Der Evidentia-Begriff in seinen rhetorisch-translatologischen Dimensionen. Ein Denkanstoß von Fritz Paepcke

Author(s):  
Alberto Gil

Evidentia is a concept passed on to us from rhetoric – more precisely from the third of the five canons of classical rhetoric, namely elocution. The goal of this canon is to achieve a stylistic quality that enables the listener to see what (s)he hears with his or her inner eye, i.e. to enable the listener to really visualize what is being said. Fritz Paepcke – whose one hundredth birthday we celebrated at this conference – applied the concept of evidentia to the field of translation studies. Within his conceptual framework, he portrayed it as a new experience – one which arises immediately, i.e., not through induction or deduction, but “as a result of the rule-governed and yet playful process of developing the most adequate wording of a translation” and from one’s interaction with the text. Paepcke did not, however, elaborate on this “intuition of intuition.” This article attempts to further develop the concept evidentia rhetorically and philosophically and to apply it to the field of translation studies. Two conceptions are particularly instrumental here: 1) The concept of fidélité créatrice as elucidated by the French philosopher Gabriel Marcel – to whom Paepcke often referred – as well as 2) the conceptual approach underlying and informing the research center Hermeneutik und Kreativität. In the latter, the processes of understanding and translating / translating and understanding are conceived of as being bi-directional and interdependent; this conception, which fuses understanding with empathy, is making new, significant inroads into translation studies. The notion of evidentia will be exemplified here using an empathetic Italian translation of a very young poet – Selma Meerbaum-Eisinger.

2021 ◽  
pp. 053901842199956
Author(s):  
Gerard Delanty

This essay is a comment on the research program launched by Frank Adloff and Sighard Neckel. My comment is specifically focused on their research agenda as outlined in their trend-setting article, ‘Futures of sustainability as modernization, transformation, and control: A conceptual framework’. The comment is also addressed more generally to the research program of the Humanities Centre for Advanced Studies ‘Futures of Sustainability’. I raise three issues: the first relates to the very idea of the future; the second concerns the notion of social imaginaries and the third question is focused on the idea of social transformation.


2019 ◽  
Vol 23 (2) ◽  
pp. 344-361
Author(s):  
Yves Gambier

The landscape in translation and interpreting is changing deeply and rapidly. For a long time, but not necessarily everywhere, translation was denied as a need (except for the political and religious powers), as effort (translation being defined as a kind of mechanical work, as substitution of words), and as a profession (translators embodying a subaltern position). Technology is bringing in certain changes in attitudes and perceptions with regards international, multilingual and multimodal communications. This article tries to define the changes and their consequences in the labelling and characterisation of the different practices. It is organised in five sections: first, we recall that translation and interpreting are only one option in international relations; then, we explain the different denials of translation in the past (or the refusal to recognize the different values of translation). In the third section, we consider how and to what extent technology is transforming today practices and markets. The ongoing changes do not boil solely to developments in Machine Translation (which started in the 1960s): community, crowdsourced/collaborative translation and volunteer translation encompass different practices. In many cases, users provide their own translations, with or without formal qualifications in translation. The evolution is not only technical but also economic and social. In addition, the fragmentation and the diversity of practices do have an impact on a multi-faceted market. In the fourth section, we emphasize that there are nowadays different concepts of translation and competitive paradigms in Translation Studies. Finally, we tackle the organisational challenge of the field, since the institutionalisation of translation and Translation Studies cannot remain the same as when there was a formal consensus on the concept of translation.


2021 ◽  
pp. 35-68
Author(s):  
Jonathan Bradbury

This chapter outlines the realist neo-Bulpittian conceptual framework, which provides both the categories for analysis that will guide the book's narrative, and the theoretical propositions that guide its analysis. The chapter proceeds in three sections. The first deals with Bulpitt's original approach and theory of UK territorial politics and centre territorial management and how they could be applied to studying territorial politics and the centre's approach to devolution in the 1990s and 2000s. The second section readdresses Rokkan and Urwin (1982) and key themes in the comparative literature to construct a framework for analysing the periphery that is consistent with Bulpitt's approach; it also considers how this framework might be applied to UK territorial politics and territorial movements for change in relation to devolution. The third section then addresses the constitutional policy literature, picking out Benz (2016). He shares Bulpitt's pessimistic assumptions of how solvable state territorial problems really are, while also providing the most clearly elaborated framework for studying the territorial constitutional policy process that we currently have. The conclusion summarises the resulting overall framework and theoretical propositions that will guide the book's analysis.


2020 ◽  
pp. 379-391
Author(s):  
Antony Rosen

Autoimmune diseases occur when a sustained, specific, adaptive immune response is generated against self-components, and results in tissue damage or dysfunction. It is now clear that an autoimmune component is a feature of many human diseases. Indeed, there are some estimates that autoimmune diseases afflict more than 3% of Western populations, and imposes a significant personal and economic burden on individuals and nations. They probably affect more commonly women than men, and have peak incidence in the third to sixth decades. This chapter will illustrate many of the principles unifying various autoimmune states, and will present a conceptual framework within which to understand their aetiology, pathogenesis, and pathology. The rapid advances in knowledge being made in this group of disorders predict that disease mechanisms will soon be more clearly understood, and will greatly impact therapeutics.


2013 ◽  
Vol 14 (8) ◽  
pp. 1457-1461
Author(s):  
Wojciech Załuski

In his brilliant paper The Logic of Proportionality: Reasoning with Non-Numerical Magnitudes, Professor Sartor provides a multi-layered analysis of proportionality based on a model of teleological reasoning governed by value-norms, arguing that this kind of reasoning is quantitative but non-numerical, i.e., operates on magnitudes to which no symbolic numerals are assigned. The analysis pursued by Professor Sartor can be divided into three parts. In the first part, drawing on the theory of bounded rationality, Professor Sartor develops a model of teleological reasoning (of which proportionality reasoning is a special case) distinguishing its four stages: Value-adoption, goal-adoption, plan-adoption, and action-adoption. In the second part, he introduces and develops in great and illuminating detail a distinction between value-norms and action-norms. In the third—main—part, Professor Sartor makes the basic claim of his paper that proportionality reasoning (i.e., reasoning aimed at establishing whether a given legislative norm interfering with some constitutionally protected right is “proportional”), involving the assessment of the impact of choices upon relevant values, is quantitative but not based on numerical magnitudes, and develops a conceptual framework for reconstructing this reasoning and explicating its constituent elements (suitability, necessity, and balancing in the strict sense). Each of these parts abounds with valuable analyses and precious insights and would deserve a separate commentary, yet I shall confine myself mainly to the analysis of the third part, in which he develops his basic claim. I shall focus in the first place on two interpretive problems my reading of Professor Sartor's paper has given rise to, though some of my remarks will concern also more technical matters.


2001 ◽  
Vol 37 (1) ◽  
pp. 93-101
Author(s):  
J. P. MORELAND

In an important paper, Clifford Williams advanced a Lockean-style argument to justify the parity thesis, viz., that there is no intellectual advantage to Christian physicalism or Christian dualism. In an article in Religious Studies I offered a critique of Williams's parity thesis and he has published a rejoinder to me in the same journal centring on my rejection of topic neutrality as an appropriate way to set up the mind–body debate. In this surrejoinder to Williams, I present his three main arguments and respond to each: (1) The dualist rejection of topic neutrality is flawed because it expresses a conceptual approach to the mind–body problem instead of the preferable empirical approach. The latter favours physicalism and, in any case, clearly supports topic neutrality. (2) If the dualist rejects the first argument, then a second parity thesis can be advanced in which an essentialist view of soul and the brain are presented in which each is essentially a thinking and feeling entity. Thus, an essentialist parity thesis is preserved. (3) If the dualist rejects the second argument, a new topic neutrality emerges in the dialectic, so topic neutrality is unavoidable. Against the first argument, I claim that Williams makes two central confusions that undermine his case and that he fails to show how the mind–body debate can be settled empirically. Against the second argument, I claim that it leaves Williams vulnerable to a topic-neutral approach to God and it merely proffers a verbal shift with a new dualism between normal and ‘special’ matter. Against the third argument, I point out that it misrepresents the dualist viewpoint and leads to two counterintuitive features that follow from topic neutrality.


2000 ◽  
Vol 33 (2) ◽  
pp. 209-222 ◽  
Author(s):  
NICOLAAS RUPKE

The three translations of Vestiges of the Natural History of Creation invested the text with new meaning. None of the translations endorsed the book for the author's advocacy of species transformation. The first translation, into German (1846), put forward the text as evincing divine design in nature. The second, into Dutch (1849), also presented Vestiges as proof of divine order in nature and, more specifically, as aiding the stabilization of society under God and king in a process of recovery from the 1848 Revolution. By contrast, the third translation, into German (1851), interpreted the book as furthering the very revolutionary, anti-ecclesiastical and anti- monarchist ideals that the Dutch edition sought to counter.


Author(s):  
David Seddon

This is the first part of an article which proposes to break new ground in developing a conceptual framework for and presenting a preliminary empirical analysis of ‘the geography of Nepalese cuisine’. This part of the article sets outsome of the elements required for an exploration of national, regional and local cuisines. It elaborates the concept of ‘cuisine’ as a historical but constantly evolving socio-economic and cultural construct (a food tradition) within a more-or-less defined geographical area. It considers the significance of ‘food availability’ and the ways in which the ‘natural’ world is classified and categorized to define what is considered edible and what is not. It explains how food preparation and processing transforms an animal, fish or plant into a food stuff or ingredient and examines how food preparation, production (including cooking) and presentation may differ and may be associated with different styles of cuisine (high and low, complex and simple, etc.). It introduces a distinction between national, regional and local cuisines and briefly considers the treatment of ‘Indian’ cuisine.DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.3126/ttp.v8i0.11518 The Third Pole: Journal of Geography Vol.8-10, pp. 62-72: 2010


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document