In an article published thirteen years ago, I tried to break new ground by showing that the texts transmitted under the titleCataleptonas the work of Virgil can be seen to form an elaborately arranged and highly allusive book of verse written by a single author. This latter, I argued, was identical with the anonymous poet who, in an epilogue, represents the preceding poems as the juvenilia of the author later known for hisBucolics,GeorgicsandAeneidand, consequently, is himself speaking in the alleged early (...) works asVirgil impersonator. This anonymous poet, however, cannot rightly be labelled a literary forger, since he repeatedly and quite unmistakably recalls each of Virgil's threeoperaas well as other texts written after the year 19b.c. Evidently, then, he is inviting his readers to take part in a literarylusus, one in which they are expected to be familiar not only with the texts ofBucolics,GeorgicsandAeneidbut also with the life of the man who wrote them. The fiction of a young Virgil is created, one who wrote his first poems—the verses referred to in the epilogue aselementaandrudis Calliope—primarily under the influence of Catullus, the said poems being, with the exception ofCatal.12 and 16, epigrams. My interpretation has borne fruit, with Irene Peirano and Markus Stachon each devoting, in 2012 and 2014 respectively, a monograph to this approach and offering what are often very thorough analytical readings of the poems as the creations of aVirgil impersonator. However, neither of these two Latinists has considered one particular interpretative aspect, which I myself had only been able to introduce very briefly into my paper: the recognition that, as many more recent studies have now further corroborated, Roman poetry books were designed for linear, sequential reading, that they have, as it were, a story to tell. Peirano, moreover, disregards in her study the threePriapeapositioned in editions before the other fifteen epigrams and shown there with their own separate numbering. In the manuscripts, however, the titleCataleptonrefers without exception to a unit comprising the threePriapeaand the fifteen epigrams. The titlePriapea, found in the catalogue of the Murbach manuscripts and in some codices, is always attached solely to the poemQuid hoc noui est?In theVita Suetoniana-Donatiana, the termsCatalepton,PriapeaandEpigrammatawere evidently used as three different titles; the author may not have seen thatCataleptonis the title of all the poems. Furthermore, I should like to point out that, counted together, ‘Virgil's’Priapeaand epigrams come to a total of seventeen poems and so match precisely both the total of seventeen books in the real Virgil's three works and the total number of Horace's epodes, of the poems, that is, which the not-so-real Virgil quite conspicuously evokes in his own penultimate poem. More significantly, however, a sequential reading of thePriapea et Epigrammatacan in fact build a watertight case for taking the texts to be, as it were, a composite whole, and that is what I intend to argue in the rest of the article. (shrink)

Die im 1./2. Jahrhundert n. Chr. von einem Anonymus verfaßte Vita Aesopi (= VA), eine „fiktionale Biographie mit Elementen des komisch-realistischen Romans“ (2), wurde zu Beginn der Neuzeit in aller Welt dadurch bekannt, daß sie in lateinischer und deutscher Übersetzung als einer von mehreren Texten in Heinrich Steinhöwels Esopus von 1476/77 erschien, einem „Bestseller“ der Frühdruckzeit. Aber das griechische Original des VA-Textes, der im 16. Jahrhundert z.B. den Autoren des Lazarillo de Tormes und des Till Eulenspiegel wichtige Anregungen gegeben haben (...) dürfte, entsprach in seinem Wortlaut nicht dem kaiserzeitlichen Text – dieser ist uns zwar nicht erhalten, aber die Version des Codex 397 in der New Yorker Pierpont Morgan Library (G) steht ihm wahrscheinlich sehr nahe –, sondern stellte eine Epitome der Urfassung dar, die recensio Westermanniana (= rec. W). Diese Version versuchte Ben Edwin Perry durch Kollation von 11 Handschriften zu rekonstruieren (Aesopica, Urbana, IL, 1952, 81-107), obwohl er bemerkte, daß innerhalb der Kodizes, auch wenn sie in der Wiedergabe des Stoffs einander mehr ähneln als G, wiederum zwei Fassungen zu unterscheiden sind, repräsentiert durch die beiden Handschriftengruppen MORNLFVW und BPS. Da nun der in Steinhöwels Ausgabe publizierte und von neuzeitlichen Autoren mehrfach rezipierte Text der VA – es handelt sich dabei um die lateinische Übersetzung des Rinuccio da Castiglione d'Arezzo – in griechischer Sprache in einem Kodex stand, der als Ahn von P gelten darf, ist es sehr verdienstlich, daß K. die eine der beiden Fassungen von rec. W, die so besonders wirkungsmächtig war – sie ist wahrscheinlich ins frühe 6. Jahrhundert zu datieren, und ihr sind außer B, P und S das Kodexblatt Th und die erst 1991 aufgetauchte Hs. A zuzuordnen –, als selbständigen Text der VA herausgegeben und zugleich sowohl literaturgeschichtlich als auch sprachwissenschaftlich analysiert hat. (shrink)

Schon von Kaiser Augustus als Aufforderung zur Unsittlichkeit missverstanden, wurde Ovids "Liebeskunst" bis weit ins 20. Jahrhundert hinein als frivoler Scherz gedeutet und meist dementsprechend übersetzt. Niklas Holzbergs schlichte Wiedergabe des Originals vermeidet die plüschige Stammtischerotik der alten Übersetzungen.

Germany's leading contemporary social theorist provides a definitive analysis of art as a social and perceptual system which not only represents an important intellectual step in discussions of art but also an important advance in systems theory. Luhmann insists on the radical incommensurability between psychic systems (perception) and social systems (communication). Art is a special kind of communication that operates at the boundary between the social system and consciousness in ways that profoundly irritate communication while remaining strictly internal to the (...) social. Each chapter elaborates a particular aspect of the general problem of art's status as a social system. The book draws on a vast body of research in the social sciences, phenomenology, evolutionary biology, cybernetics, and information theory, combined with an intimate knowledge of art history, literature, aesthetics, and contemporary literary theory. The book also engages virtually every major theorist of art and aesthetics from Baumgarten to Derrida. (shrink)

In this paper I argue that it’s impossible for there to be a single universal theory of meaning for a language. First, I will consider some minimal expressiveness requirements a language must meet to be able to express semantic claims. Then I will argue that in order to have a single unified theory of meaning, these expressiveness requirements must be satisfied by a language which the semantic theory itself applies to. That is, we would need a language which can express (...) its own meaning. It has been well-known since Tarski that theories of meaning whose central notion is truth can’t be expressed in a language which they apply to. Here, I develop Quine’s formulation of the Liar Paradox in grammatical terms and use this to extend Tarski’s result to all theories of meaning. This general version of the paradox can be formalised as a special case of the Lawvere Fixed-Point Theorem applied to a categorial grammar. Taken together with the initial arguments, I infer that a universal theory of meaning is impossible and conclude the paper with a brief discussion on what alternatives are available. (shrink)

Language Lost and Found takes as its starting-point Iris Murdoch's claim that "we have suffered a general loss of concepts." By means of a thorough reading of Iris Murdoch's philosophy in the light of this difficulty, it offers a detailed examination of the problem of linguistic community and the roots of the thought that some philosophical problems arise due to our having lost the sense of our own language. But it is also a call for a radical reconsideration of how (...) philosophy and literature relate to each other on a general level and in Murdoch's authorship in particular. (shrink)

This chapter brings together Murdoch’s thoughts about language with other central aspects of her thought such as love, attention, perfectionism and morality. By making clear how Murdoch’s variety of linguistic philosophy differs from contemporary philosophy of language, this paper also shows that Murdoch’s philosophy contains the seeds for a fruitful form of philosophizing which brings the moral and aesthetic dimensions of language into view. “Taking the linguistic method seriously” means making clear the ways in which all concepts belong to a (...) fabric that is changing on a personal level as well as an historical one. One of the things that Murdoch can help us see is that one problem with contemporary philosophy of language, is that it does not take the linguistic method seriously enough. (shrink)

In this paper I construct a system of semantics for classical and intuitionistic propositional logic based on epistemic norms governing belief expansion. Working in the AGM-framework of belief change, I give a generalisation of Gärdenfors’ notion of belief systems which can be defined without reference to a logical consequence operator by using a version of the Ramsey Test. These belief expansion systems can then be used to define epistemic models which are sound and complete for either classical or intuitionistic propositional (...) logic depending on which of the two notions of epistemic validity, identified by Levi and Arló-Costa, is used. Finally, I offer a discussion on how these results can be understood as providing a model theory within the framework of logical expressivism. (shrink)