During the Middle Ages many Greek mathematical and astronomical texts were translated from Greek into Arabic and from Arabic into Latin. There were many factors complicating the study of them, such as translation from or into other languages, redactions, multiple translations, and independently transmitted scholia. A literal translation risks less in loss of meaning, but can be clumsy. This article includes lists of translations and a large bibliography, divided into sections.

Summary As a divinatory device based on the numerical values of names, onomancy requires a system of letter-number equivalents. In Greek and the Semitic languages, a unique system is used, which consists of ascribing the first nine letters of the alphabet to the units (1–9), the following nine letters to the tens (10–90), and the remaining letters to the hundreds (100-). Given the structural similarities between those languages, the transfer of onomancy between Greek and Semitic cultures does not pose particular (...) problems. Difficulties arise when onomancy is translated into Latin, where there is no such system of letter-number equivalents. This article examines the various solutions put forward by the translators and authors of the earliest Latin onomantic texts of Arabic origin, the so-called Alchandreana. (shrink)

The volume gathers eleven studies on the intellectual exchanges during the Middle Ages among the three cultures which existed side by side in the same geographical area, i.e. the vast space from the British Isles to the Sahara Desert, and from the Douro Valley to the Hindu Kush. These three cultures – who may not be reduced to their confession or ethnicity – are historically related to each other in many respects, both material (trade, wars, marriages) and immaterial (the interdependence (...) among their religious narratives and their philosophical speculations). The studies herein presented focus on some peculiar examples of the transcultural interactions among exponents of the Arabic, Hebrew and Latin philosophical and theological traditions. While we do not want to downplay the fundamental role of the religious contexts, our focus on the linguistic denominations of these cultures aims at drawing attention to the conceptual medium, or rather media, which underlined and shaped the interactions and interplays among these traditions – interplays that were characterized by the contact of these three languages being used by people of different religious beliefs in their quest for knowledge: Spanish Jews writing in Arabic, Jews collaborating in the translation of Arabic texts into Latin through the vernacular, Western Muslims whose writings were read mainly by Jews and Christians in Hebrew and Latin. (shrink)

The paper first presents the necessary background to appreciate al-Fârâbî’s views and his originality. It explains the issues Anicent philosophers faced: the natural vs. the conventional origin of language, the problem of ambiguous words, and the difficulty to express Greek thought into Latin. It then sketches andcontrasts the views of Christianity and Islam on the origin of language and the diversity of idioms. It argues that al-Fârâbî follows the philosophical tradition butdevelops it in sophisticated and original manner (...) by telling the story of the origin and development of language and giving little place to the Islamic tradition. Foral-Fârâbî language emerges naturally but develops by convention in three phases: The constitution of utterances and crafts to ensure basic necessities; The development of rhetoric, poetry, memorizing, writing, and the language arts; the development of dialectic, sophistical reasoning and demonstration that leads to philosophy reaching its perfection with with Aristotle. Religion for him is posterior to philosophy and derives form it. As for al-Fârâbî philosophy in Islamic lands was imported from Greece, he includes rules to translate technical philosophical terms from one language into another. (shrink)

Considers the literary genres in which logical texts were written in the post-classical period. Articles describe the kinds of texts that were written and the implications for educational practices, as well as the continuities and developments between one language culture and another.".

In recent decades, interest in the history and philosophy of the natural sciences has increased significantly. This interest has made scholars aware of the existing knowledge gap in these areas and has brought a kind of 'pressure' for more articles and books on the subject. Indeed, it also motivates academics to start new projects related to these disciplines. Volumes like this are much needed for scholars in the field, given the high amount of information they contain. This rich volume aims (...) at stimulating the field by presenting current research papers on Avicenna's influence on the fields of physics and cosmology. In order to achieve this goal, this work contains thirteen articles related to the reception of the Persian philosopher's thought in these areas in the Middle Ages. The book revolves around the three different languages and cultures which were crucial for the reception of Avicenna's thought. Hence, the volume is arranged in three main sections focusing on the Arabic, Hebrew and Latin traditions. It also contains an Index of Avicenna's Works with Passages Cited and an Index of Names. The introduction is rather short compared to other sections of the book. It covers the general topics presented in the volume. The first six chapters deal with the Arabic tradition ; the next two have to do with the Hebrew reception of Avicenna, and the last five analyse the Latin reception of Avicenna's physics and cosmology. (shrink)

Between 1490 to 1625, twenty-two editions of Galen's opera omnia were published in Latin, while only two in Greek. In the Western world Galen's literary production was mostly known through Latin translations, even in the sixteenth century, when Greek medicine was being rediscovered in its original language. The paper discusses the twenty-two Latin editions of Galen's writings and how they evolved. In these editions the number of works increased, especially from 1490 to 1533, while later, from (...) 1576–1577 to 1586, forged commentaries on Hippocrates were added, when Galenic medicine was declining. Moreover, in 1490 Galen's works were printed in medieval translations from Arabic and Greek, while by 1541–1542 most of them had already received new humanist translations. The humanist translations, which started about 1480, depended on Greek manuscripts until 1525, when the Aldine provided the standard Greek text of Galen. Afterwards, the Greek manuscripts were used to correct the Latin, especially in the editions from 1541–1542 to 1565. Therefore the complete Latin editions included most of the philological work on Galen during the sixteenth century, as well as discussions on the authorship of some works, on the order in which they had to be read or printed, and on their selection for medical education. (shrink)

The logical rule of contraposition as applied to a particular affirmative proposition (I-contraposition), despite its rejection in the medieval Latin logic, had a different history in the medieval Arabic logic, varying from common acknowledgement to total dismissal (it was accepted by Avicenna and by all of his followers in the eleventh and twelfth centuries and rejected by all of Arabic logicians in the late thirteenth century onwards). This paper is a narrative of the fate of I-contraposition in (...) the early Arabic logic. I will study Avicenna’s, al-Suhrawardī’s, al-Rāzī’s, al-Kashshī’s, and al-Khūnajī’s views on this rule. Although Avicenna explicitly acknowledged I-contraposition in a brief note, and in an apparently Meinongian language, the other four figures found I-contraposition problematic and listed some counterexamples to it. Nonetheless, they all attempted to justify Avicenna’s acceptance of the rule by restricting its application conditions. These efforts led to interesting syntactic and semantic analyses but gathered little attention from later medieval logicians. Finally, in the middle Arabic logic, the revised versions of I-contraposition were also declared invalid. (shrink)

In contemporary literary Hindi there is an abundance of Perso-Arabic loanwords which often function similarly to words of Sanskrit origin. Despite their semantic proximity, each of them can have different connotational meanings and cultural associations. Furthermore, depending on the context, one of them will be preferred to the other. This situation can become an issue when translating from Hindi into Polish. In this paper, I will investigate whether these loanwords should be considered as a third language in translation. (...) If this is the case, they make the text a multicultural one, and, thus, raise the question of how to translate them into Polish, being at the same time focused on a monolingual recipient and their cognitive comfort while not impoverishing and distorting the process of translation. Moreover, I will propose an approach which can be of assistance in achieving this goal, relying on French and Latin loanwords used in the Polish language. (shrink)

The thesis deals with a section of the major philosophical summa by Avicenna (Ibn Sīnā, d. 1037), namely the Book of the Healing (Kitāb al-Šifāʾ). The summa is structured into four parts, devoted to Logic, Natural Philosophy, Mathematics and Metaphysics; the section at stake is Avicenna’s reworking of Porphyry’s Isagoge (Kitāb al-Madḫal, i.e. “Book of the Introduction”) opening the section of Logic of the Šifāʾ. The thesis is articulated into three main parts, namely (i) an edition of the Arabic (...) text of Avicenna’s Madḫal, (ii) an English translation and (iii) a systematic commentary; these three main parts are preceded by an Introduction (0) divided into two halves: (0a) a General Introduction focused on the doctrinal major innovations of the work and (0b) an Introduction to the Edition of the text, which offers a first comprehensive study of its direct and early indirect tradition and explains the criteria of the edition. (i) The only previous edition of Avicenna’s Madḫal was the one printed in Cairo in 1952 (then reprinted in Tehran in 1983 and in Beirut in 1993), based on ten manuscripts. The huge manuscript tradition of Avicenna’s Madḫal – and, more in general, of Avicenna’s Book of the Healing – is still a matter of investigation. According to the provisional results of the bibliographical research conducted in the present work, it can be estimated that the manuscript tradition of the Madḫal amounts to at least 119 certain witnesses and 14 possible additional witnesses (as explained in the Introduction to the edition, 0b). The text of the Cairo edition, far from being representative of the whole textual tradition, was reconstructed on the basis of ten manuscripts that were not selected on the basis of philological criteria and whose reciprocal stemmatic relations were not clear. Although a critical edition based on all the 119 certain witnesses of the work exceeds the scope of the present work, the edition provided in the thesis takes into account a larger number of manuscripts than the Cairo edition did and, most importantly, selects them by means of a preliminary collation made on portions of the text. The purpose of this preliminary collation is making the selection of the manuscripts employed less arbitrary and providing a reconstruction of their stemmatic relations (in the Introduction, 0b). Overall, 32 manuscripts among the 68 inspected were employed in the edition here proposed, 21 of which were systematically collated and 11 were eliminated as codices descripti. The present edition also assumes as a witness the twelfth-century Latin translation of the work, which is, at the present moment, among the earliest extant witnesses of the text. Hopefully, this editorial work allowed us to improve the text of the Cairo edition in a number of points that are crucial to the correct understanding of Avicenna’s argumentation. (ii) As this project started, complete translations of Avicenna’s Madḫal in modern languages were only available in Turkish and Russian. Chapters of the work had also been translated in other languages, but an English translation of the whole work was still a desideratum. A complete English translation is provided in the thesis, based on the newly-established Arabic text of the work and aiming at preserving the major possible consistency in rendering the relevant philosophical terms. As a complement to the translation, an apparatus of notes is offered to facilitate the immediate understanding of the text. (iii) The third section of the thesis consists in a systematic commentary on Avicenna’s Madḫal, which is meant to support a deeper understanding of the text in its entirety. The commentary deals with both historical and philosophical aspects; more in detail, it includes an analysis and an identification, when possible, of Avicenna’s sources, and underlines the points of major philosophical interest of the work, which are dealt in a more comprehensive manner in the General Introduction (0a). (shrink)

The more passages one examines in the translations from Arabic to Latin and from Arabic to English and other modern languages, the more mistakes one comes across in the translation of the Arabic expression ‘alā al-qaṣd al-awwal . The mistakes stem from the failure to distinguish between two senses of the expression, one an adverb, and the other a famous philosophic concept. Failing to distinguish between the two senses, the translators translated the phrase literally, often with (...) unsatisfactory results. In this paper, I shall indicate a Greek word which was rendered by the Arabic ‘alā al-qaṣd al-awwal. I shall refer to some English translations from the Arabic and show how wrong they are. I shall suggest that in Arabic philosophy itself al-Fārābī, rather than Avicenna, may have been the origin of the philosophic concepts of “first and second intentions.” I shall point out that although these concepts may have been introduced into Latin scholasticism by Raymond Lull, he could not have derived them from the Logic of al-Ghazālī, as has been alleged. (shrink)

Language is a live organism and as every other living being develops and is enriched with new words and terms, which enter the life of society together with the new tool, i.e. they enter in and mix with the order of Albanian words. Such a thing is inevitable and in some cases even useful, but every word that is lined up in the order of Albanian words must be well filtered. “The introduction of new words and exclusion of old (...) ones is a natural process, and it happens in any language. This is what happened with the Greek borrowings in Latin, with the Arabic borrowings in Greek, with the Latin borrowings in many European languages, with the Persian borrowings in Turkish, with the Turkish borrowings in Albanian, etc.” - Prof. Hajri Shehu emphasizes in a scientific interview. In recent decades, with the expansion of the Internet, many foreign words began to enter and be used in the Albanian language. English took up more space than expected; in addition to penetrating through various tool notions, it also replaced centuries-old native words of Albanian. The paper has been divided into three parts and in each part an issue has been dealt with: the first part talks about the use of foreign words and the existing words in Albanian; the second part deals with the use of emoticons used instead of words and the third part deals with writing errors in the Albanian language. These are some of the issues that have created a great concern for the Albanian language in this century and they certainly need to be addressed seriously to prevent the dangers that may threaten it. (shrink)

All intellectual histories of the Middle Ages note that Greek and Arabic science, medicine, commentary and philosophy had an enormous influence upon the great intellectual achievements of the later Middle Ages in the Latin West. Yet, these same histories also tend to cast the condemnations of 1277 as a watershed moment when the Christian West rejected the science and philosophy of pagans and infidels, and especially the synthesis of the two, the commentaries on Aristotle’s works by Averroes. Recognizing (...) the oddness of this narrative, one of simultaneous absorption and rejection, historians have been happy to divide the philosophers and theologians into progressives and conservatives. However, such a division seems only to compound the oddness of their original narrative, superimposing a political language popular in the 1960’s and 70’s onto the late thirteenth century. The division leaves in one corner the progressives like Siger, Thomas and Albert, who were open to the new sciences and in another corner, the conservatives, like Henry of Ghent and Robert Kilwardby, who sought to protect the old, traditional ways of thinking in 1277 by a codification of an orthodoxy. Unfortunately, this attempt to salvage the master narrative of simultaneous absorption and rejection fails to capture the intellectual positions and alliances at the time of the condemnations and their significance for later developments in the thinking of the Latin West. (shrink)

This volume contains the first critical edition of the Summa Alexandrinorum, that is the medieval Latin translation made in 1243 by Hermann the German of an Arabic abridgment of the Nicomachean Ethics known as the Iḫtiṣār al-Iskandarānīyīn. It is accompanied by a French translation. The volume also contains a full study of the manuscript tradition of the Latin text and sets out the principles used in the edition, which takes account, where necessary, of the Arabic version (...) of the text, which has survived in the form of fragments. A study of the origin of the Summa Alexandrinorum and the relations between the Summa and the fragments and testimonies which are extant in other traditions and different languages completes the volume. Ce volume propose la toute première édition critique, accompagnée d'une traduction française, de la Summa Alexandrinorum, traduction latine médiévale exécutée en 1243 par Hermann l'Allemand d'un abrégé arabe de l'Éthique à Nicomaque connu sous le titre d'Iḫtiṣār al-Iskandarānīyīn. Il présente également une étude complète de la tradition manuscrite du texte latin, et les principes d'édition adoptés dans l'édition, qui prennent en compte, ponctuellement, la version arabe du texte qui a été conservée sous la forme de fragments. L'étude de l'origine de la Summa Alexandrinorum et des relations entre la Summa et les fragments et témoignages conservés dans d'autres langues et appartenant à autant de traditions parallèles et diverses vient compléter ce volume. (shrink)

The present discussion derives from a larger research project that concerns the medieval Latin translation of Averroes’ Middle Commentary on the Nicomachean Ethics. The translation was carried out by Hermann the German in Toledo in 1240. I am concerned here specifically with nine passages that are distributed over three chapters of the Commentary in which the Latin translation is sprinkled with transliterations based on Greek and Arabic terms. These transliterations, which are not glosses, can be understood on (...) several levels, and these, in turn, raise questions about the boundary between transliteration proper and translation that borrows from the source language a term which is then integrated into the Latin lexicon in the form of a calque or ‘loan translation’. Examining these transliterations makes it possible, first, to show that the translator does not follow a uniform method throughout the text, which could imply the existence of several translators or several collaborators with disti... (shrink)

The Byzantine dreambook known in the tradition as The Oneirocriticon of Achmet has had a long and influential history both in its field and in scholarship. It is the longest of the eight surviving Byzantine books on dream interpretation, and most likely also the oldest. It was compiled during the Macedonian renaissance—specifically, the two termini of 843 and 1075 can be established—possibly in the reign of Leo VI (r. 886–912), to whom it may have been dedicated, and possibly through the (...) influence of his Arab minister Samonas. It was translated early into Latin, in 1176 (by contrast, the famous ancient dreambook of Artemidorus was not translated until 1539), and “through this translation found its way into several European and vernacular languages from the late thirteenth century onward” (p. 4). The scholarly study of the work began in 1577, with the preface Johann Loewenklau wrote for his Latin translation of the Greek text, and continued apace to this day. The book by Maria Mavroudi under review here, from which this information is taken (chapter 1), is the latest in a long series of studies. It is also the most exhaustive and meticulous in its research and the first fully to take into account, in a professional and exemplary manner, the Arabic sources of the work. Exhaustive, but perhaps also exhausting—one may object that 471 pages of text (exclusive of prefatory material and bibliographies and indices) for a study of a mere dreambook may be too many, though apparently necessary, for Mavroudi's book contends against the weight of previous scholarship and offers much needed correctives. (shrink)

The Renaissance of scientific thought in twelfth-century Western culture, when alchemy was introduced into the Latin schools, was largely due to the wave of translations, mainly from Arabic into Latin, but also including translations into and from Hebrew, sometimes with vernacular languages as intermediaries. Alchemy, whose tradition had been broken in the West at the end of the Hellenistic age, gained considerable attention—albeit less than astronomy/astrology and medicine—from the twelfth-century translators, who presented Latin culture with a (...) hitherto unknown doctrine that was completely different from any other science. Alchemy, as the Latin Middle Ages received it, is the philosophical search for the agent of material perfection by means of the manipulation of base materials. It thereby united theory and practice in a way unexpected by Latin scholars. In fact, alchemy as a doctrine was inseparable from laboratory practice; and this practice so much resembled well-established craftsmen's labor that for a long period the place of alchemy in the divisio disciplinarum wavered between the mechanical and the liberal arts. (shrink)

A variety of commentators have explored the similarities between pragmatism and Thomas Reid’s Philosophy of Common Sense. Peirce himself claims his version of pragmatism either (loosely) is, or entails, a Critical Common-sensism, a blend of what is best in Kant and Reid. In this paper I argue for a neglected aspect of the relation between Peirce and Reid, and of each to common sense: linguistics. First, I summarize Peirce’s account of what distinguishes his common-sensism from Reid’s. Second, I argue for (...) the importance of appeals to linguistic universals by Reid as both a source for identifying common sense beliefs, and a basis for justifying them. While Peirce is occasionally tempted by such appeals, overall he is critical of appeals to language, especially as most Western philosophers have been familiar with a small set of (Indo-)European languages; say, English, French, German, Greek, Italian, and Latin. This leads to the third section, which concerns Peirce’s familiarity with major nineteenth century linguists, and his contention that the ‘peculiarity’ of Western European languages has impeded the development of logic and philosophy. In particular, I look at unpublished manuscripts where Peirce summarizes his own study of non-European languages, ranging from Arabic, to Ngarrindjeri, to Xhosa. Peirce was only an amateur linguist, and also aware of the challenges of doing cross-cultural linguistics through comparative grammar; e.g., the temptation to force unfamiliar languages onto the “Procrustean Bed of Aryan grammar” (CP 2.211). Nonetheless, this study left him suspicious of any claims of linguistic universals, and supported his anti-psychologism. That is, not only should logic and philosophy not be based upon psychology (at least as a special science), they should also be independent of linguistics. However, Peirce also advances something like the so-called Sapir-Whorf hypothesis, that language determines, or at least conditions, thought. The question now becomes what is the nature of a philosophy of common sense, even a critical one, without a common language, or possibly no commonalities across languages? (shrink)

Due to the importance of Aristotle’s Peri Hermeneias in Medieval Arabic and Latin, I took this text as a relatively shared script that is interpreted by Al-Farabi and Aquinas.

Alan R. Perreiah - Renaissance Truth and the Latin Language Turn - Journal of the History of Philosophy 44:2 Journal of the History of Philosophy 44.2 319-321 Ann Moss. Renaissance Truth and the Latin Language Turn. New York: Oxford University Press, 2003. Pp. 306. Cloth, $74.00. Ann Moss offers an exciting and informative history of humanism from Johannes Balbus through Melanchthon, who completed the "turn" from scholastic to humanistic Latin. She marshals considerable evidence from lexicography (...) and letters that scholastics and humanists cultivated two idioms of Latin that created "two different mind-sets" , two "orders of truth-values" , and "two Latin speech communities that talked past one another" . While her main thesis that the "two linguistic universes" were "incommensurable" is questionable, it is a useful heuristic device to highlight differences between the two traditions. Moss illustrates many of her claims by controversies surrounding the legend of St. Ann, mother of Mary. Whether she is misled by the rhetoric of those heated debates on religious folklore, or whether they support her claim of "incommensurability" must be.. (shrink)

This volume comprises a new critical edition of Vico’s original Latin text and a faithful translation of this early work on metaphysics. Robert Miner’s introduction offers valuable guidance in understanding this challenging text and assessing its significance.

INTRODUCTION Elio Gianturco translated Giambattista Vico's De Nostri Temporis Studiorum Ratione into English in 1965. l He began the introduction to that ...

This volume comprises a new critical edition of Vico’s original Latin text and a faithful translation of this early work on metaphysics. Robert Miner’s introduction offers valuable guidance in understanding this challenging text and assessing its significance.