{"title":"Some History of Scholarship","authors":"P. Probert","doi":"10.1093/OSO/9780198841609.003.0002","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Modern discussion of the Latin accent can be said to have begun in earnest with the publication of Weil and Benloew’s Théorie générale de l’accentuation latine in 1855. Responses to this work divided scholars strongly into two opposing camps—or rather, they strengthened and extended a pre-existing division into two camps that had originally concerned only the relationship (if any) between Latin metrical forms and the position of the Latin word accent. On closer inspection the two camps turn out to be rather loose alliances, but when the focus is on the Latin accent itself they rally around opposing answers to a central question: did Latin have a pitch accent or a stress accent? Chapter 2 sketches the beginnings of this battle and the main turns it has taken, and then argues that it is a mistake to see ‘pitch or stress accent’ as the crucial question, or even as a meaningful one. Even attempts to offer intermediate views mostly put a misconceived and unhelpful question at the centre of the argument. But if this question can be put to one side, some genuine questions come into view.","PeriodicalId":269582,"journal":{"name":"Latin Grammarians on the Latin Accent","volume":"12 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-06-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Latin Grammarians on the Latin Accent","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/OSO/9780198841609.003.0002","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Modern discussion of the Latin accent can be said to have begun in earnest with the publication of Weil and Benloew’s Théorie générale de l’accentuation latine in 1855. Responses to this work divided scholars strongly into two opposing camps—or rather, they strengthened and extended a pre-existing division into two camps that had originally concerned only the relationship (if any) between Latin metrical forms and the position of the Latin word accent. On closer inspection the two camps turn out to be rather loose alliances, but when the focus is on the Latin accent itself they rally around opposing answers to a central question: did Latin have a pitch accent or a stress accent? Chapter 2 sketches the beginnings of this battle and the main turns it has taken, and then argues that it is a mistake to see ‘pitch or stress accent’ as the crucial question, or even as a meaningful one. Even attempts to offer intermediate views mostly put a misconceived and unhelpful question at the centre of the argument. But if this question can be put to one side, some genuine questions come into view.
现代关于拉丁口音的讨论可以说是在1855年Weil和Benloew的thsamorie gsamnsamrale de l 'accentuation latine出版之后开始的。对这项工作的回应将学者们强烈地分成了两个对立的阵营——或者更确切地说,他们加强并扩展了一个已经存在的分裂,使之成为两个阵营,这两个阵营最初只关注拉丁格律形式和拉丁单词重音位置之间的关系(如果有的话)。仔细观察就会发现,这两个阵营是相当松散的联盟,但当重点放在拉丁口音本身上时,他们会围绕一个核心问题给出截然相反的答案:拉丁语有音高口音还是重音口音?第二章概述了这场战斗的开始和它所采取的主要转变,然后认为将“音高或重音”视为关键问题是错误的,甚至是有意义的问题。即使试图提供中间观点,也大多是把一个误解和无益的问题置于争论的中心。但是,如果这个问题可以放在一边,一些真正的问题就会出现。