manifestos error? Falsches Zitieren und literarische Kommunikation (zu Gel. 15.6).
This paper examines a statement of Aulus Gellius about a misleading attribution in Cicero's De gloria to explore the conditions and possibilities of misquotation in an ancient text. To do this, it draws on the conversational maxims of Paul Grice and analyzes the modern solutions presented for the pa...
| Publicado en: | Mnemosyne Vol. 66; no. 3; pp. 411 - 433 |
|---|---|
| Autor principal: | |
| Formato: | Artículo |
| Publicado: |
Brill Academic Publishers
2013
|
| Materias: | |
| Acceso en línea: | Ver este registro en EBSCOhost |
| Sumario: | This paper examines a statement of Aulus Gellius about a misleading attribution in Cicero's De gloria to explore the conditions and possibilities of misquotation in an ancient text. To do this, it draws on the conversational maxims of Paul Grice and analyzes the modern solutions presented for the passage as well as the opinions Gellius implicitly expresses. Its thesis is that the interpretation of misquotations, both ancient and modern, follows similar principles and is determined by assumptions of intention made by the interpreter. It will be argued that Gellius' way of presenting the misquotation is a rhetorical strategy to provoke critical consideration of quotations by the recipient. |
|---|