VII. After the Poet

1988 ◽  
Vol 20 ◽  
pp. 40-47

I am not competent to evaluate translations into any language other than English, but I am told that O. Weinrich’s rendering into German verse (1960), in an edition which is both scholarly and sensitive, is outstanding.In general the versions which have appeared since the war are free from the sort of artificiality which had dogged most earlier versions, a hangover from the Victorian age. (Catullus had his own artificiality, but that is a different story.) They are also free from expurgation and bowdlerizing, complete, frank in approach and in language, in fact authentically reflecting the original. The first of these, and one of the best, was J. Lindsay, Catullus: the Complete Poems (1948). Lindsay had made an earlier translation, but this was better. He was a vigorous Australian, an original but erratic scholar, and a minor poet of genuine merit. Other meritorious versions of the full corpus have since appeared, by F. O. Copley (1957), R. A. Swanson (1959), C. H. Sisson (1966), Peter Whigham (1966), James Michie (1969), R. Myers, and R. J. Ormsby (1972), Frederick Raphael and Kenneth McLeish (1978). Several of these translators are both scholars and men of letters, holding university posts in classics. Several are poets in their own right: Sisson once wrote: ‘I have had my eye on Catullus for years – as what poet would not who could make out even a little of the Latin?’ Several have made some reputation for translations of other authors. Jean Granarolo comments that the versions are often scholarly or, at all events, conceived for a wide popularization. I omit one version of which a reviewer said that the reader was ‘confronted with a Catullus who seems to have stepped from the pages of Finnegan’s Wake’.

2006 ◽  
Vol 34 (1) ◽  
pp. 27-45 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kay Heath

AT AGE FIFTY-TWO, THOMAS HARDYwas beginning to feel uneasy about aging. On October 11, 1892, he wrote to his friend Arthur Blomfield: “Hurt my tooth at breakfast-time. I look in the glass. Am conscious of the humiliating sorriness of my earthly tabernacle…. Why should a man's mind have been thrown into such close, sad, sensational, inexplicable relations with such a precarious object as his own body!” (F. Hardy 13–14). This moment of specular disgust was ultimately recorded in a poem: I look into my glass,And view my wasting skin,And say, “Would God it came to passMy heart had shrunk as thin!”For then, I, undistrestBy hearts grown cold to me,Could lonely wait my endless restWith equanimity.But Time, to make me grieve,Part steals, lets part abide;And shakes this fragile frame at eveWith throbbings of noontide. (T. Hardy,Complete Poems81)


1997 ◽  
Vol 2 (4) ◽  
pp. 1-3
Author(s):  
James B. Talmage

Abstract The AMA Guides to the Evaluation of Permanent Impairment, Fourth Edition, uses the Injury Model to rate impairment in people who have experienced back injuries. Injured individuals who have not required surgery can be rated using differentiators. Challenges arise when assessing patients whose injuries have been treated surgically before the patient is rated for impairment. This article discusses five of the most common situations: 1) What is the impairment rating for an individual who has had an injury resulting in sciatica and who has been treated surgically, either with chemonucleolysis or with discectomy? 2) What is the impairment rating for an individual who has a back strain and is operated on without reasonable indications? 3) What is the impairment rating of an individual with sciatica and a foot drop (major anterior tibialis weakness) from L5 root damage? 4) What is the rating for an individual who is injured, has true radiculopathy, undergoes a discectomy, and is rated as Category III but later has another injury and, ultimately, a second disc operation? 5) What is the impairment rating for an older individual who was asymptomatic until a minor strain-type injury but subsequently has neurogenic claudication with severe surgical spinal stenosis on MRI/myelography? [Continued in the September/October 1997 The Guides Newsletter]


2018 ◽  
Vol 23 (4) ◽  
pp. 9-10
Author(s):  
James Talmage ◽  
Jay Blaisdell

Abstract Pelvic fractures are relatively uncommon, and in workers’ compensation most pelvic fractures are the result of an acute, high-impact event such as a fall from a roof or an automobile collision. A person with osteoporosis may sustain a pelvic fracture from a lower-impact injury such as a minor fall. Further, major parts of the bladder, bowel, reproductive organs, nerves, and blood vessels pass through the pelvic ring, and traumatic pelvic fractures that result from a high-impact event often coincide with damaged organs, significant bleeding, and sensory and motor dysfunction. Following are the steps in the rating process: 1) assign the diagnosis and impairment class for the pelvis; 2) assign the functional history, physical examination, and clinical studies grade modifiers; and 3) apply the net adjustment formula. Because pelvic fractures are so uncommon, raters may be less familiar with the rating process for these types of injuries. The diagnosis-based methodology for rating pelvic fractures is consistent with the process used to rate other musculoskeletal impairments. Evaluators must base the rating on reliable data when the patient is at maximum medical impairment and must assess possible impairment from concomitant injuries.


Author(s):  
Katherine Guérard ◽  
Sébastien Tremblay

In serial memory for spatial information, some studies showed that recall performance suffers when the distance between successive locations increases relatively to the size of the display in which they are presented (the path length effect; e.g., Parmentier et al., 2005) but not when distance is increased by enlarging the size of the display (e.g., Smyth & Scholey, 1994). In the present study, we examined the effect of varying the absolute and relative distance between to-be-remembered items on memory for spatial information. We manipulated path length using small (15″) and large (64″) screens within the same design. In two experiments, we showed that distance was disruptive mainly when it is varied relatively to a fixed reference frame, though increasing the size of the display also had a small deleterious effect on recall. The insertion of a retention interval did not influence these effects, suggesting that rehearsal plays a minor role in mediating the effects of distance on serial spatial memory. We discuss the potential role of perceptual organization in light of the pattern of results.


1956 ◽  
Vol 1 (12) ◽  
pp. 366-367
Author(s):  
EPHRAIM ROSEN
Keyword(s):  

1978 ◽  
Vol 23 (5) ◽  
pp. 376-377 ◽  
Author(s):  
HENRI TAJFEL
Keyword(s):  

1976 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jackie Shearer ◽  
Terry Signaigo ◽  
Mary Tiseo ◽  
Jay Watkins
Keyword(s):  

2004 ◽  
Author(s):  
Carlin Flora
Keyword(s):  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document