Pub Date : 2019-10-17DOI: 10.1093/oso/9780198810803.003.0003
D. Butterfield
In 1843, with the publication of the Greek-English Lexicon of Liddell and Scott, the decision to abandon the scholarly garb of Latin and opt for direct expression in the vernacular was, in its time, a remarkable one. And yet, despite almost every Greek lemma being rendered by Liddell and Scott into English, Latin plays a significant role in their Lexicon. In fact, every single page of the work, at least in its first few editions, contains some Latin. This chapter explores how and why Latin continued to play a significant role for Liddell and Scott, notwithstanding the impropriety of its allegedly ‘feeble and defective’ character. It traces a course through these different roles played by Latin in the Lexicon, before turning to the more protean—and somewhat purposeless—deployment of the language before its time was called by the editors of the ninth edition (1925–40).
{"title":"Latin in the Lexicon","authors":"D. Butterfield","doi":"10.1093/oso/9780198810803.003.0003","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780198810803.003.0003","url":null,"abstract":"In 1843, with the publication of the Greek-English Lexicon of Liddell and Scott, the decision to abandon the scholarly garb of Latin and opt for direct expression in the vernacular was, in its time, a remarkable one. And yet, despite almost every Greek lemma being rendered by Liddell and Scott into English, Latin plays a significant role in their Lexicon. In fact, every single page of the work, at least in its first few editions, contains some Latin. This chapter explores how and why Latin continued to play a significant role for Liddell and Scott, notwithstanding the impropriety of its allegedly ‘feeble and defective’ character. It traces a course through these different roles played by Latin in the Lexicon, before turning to the more protean—and somewhat purposeless—deployment of the language before its time was called by the editors of the ninth edition (1925–40).","PeriodicalId":145473,"journal":{"name":"Liddell and Scott","volume":"7 1 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2019-10-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"115482600","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2019-10-17DOI: 10.1093/oso/9780198810803.003.0006
B. Vine
The editors of Liddell and Scott (LSJ), whose final fascicle appeared in 1940, could scarcely have imagined the 1952 decipherment of Linear B and the wealth of information it provided about the Greek language and Mycenaean culture. The Preface to the 1968 Supplement justified the absence of Mycenaean Greek material with the assertion that ‘[t]he scholarly world is at present divided on the validity of the Ventris decipherment’. While it is true that pockets of resistance to the decipherment persisted until surprisingly late, the alleged scholarly division seems overstated for the mid-1960s, when major handbooks like those of Ventris and Chadwick, Vilborg, and Palmer were very much part of mainstream scholarship. However that may be, a decision was finally reached to incorporate Mycenaean Greek forms into the 1996 Revised Supplement. This chapter takes stock of that decision so as to assess some aspects of its implementation in LSJ Supplement, and then considers what this may mean for the treatment of Mycenaean Greek in future editions.
《利德尔和斯科特》(Liddell and Scott, LSJ)的最后一本分册于1940年出版，编者们几乎无法想象1952年对线形文字B的解读，以及它所提供的有关希腊语言和迈锡尼文化的丰富信息。1968年增刊的序言为迈锡尼希腊材料的缺失辩护，断言“目前学术界对文特里斯解密的有效性存在分歧”。虽然对解密的抵制一直持续到令人惊讶的晚，但所谓的学术分裂在20世纪60年代中期似乎被夸大了，当时像文特里斯、查德威克、维尔伯格和帕尔默的主要手册是主流学术的重要组成部分。无论如何，最终达成了一项决定，将迈锡尼希腊语形式纳入1996年修订补编。本章将对这一决定进行盘点，以便评估其在LSJ增刊中实施的某些方面，然后考虑这对未来版本中迈锡尼希腊文的处理可能意味着什么。
{"title":"Incorporating New Evidence","authors":"B. Vine","doi":"10.1093/oso/9780198810803.003.0006","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780198810803.003.0006","url":null,"abstract":"The editors of Liddell and Scott (LSJ), whose final fascicle appeared in 1940, could scarcely have imagined the 1952 decipherment of Linear B and the wealth of information it provided about the Greek language and Mycenaean culture. The Preface to the 1968 Supplement justified the absence of Mycenaean Greek material with the assertion that ‘[t]he scholarly world is at present divided on the validity of the Ventris decipherment’. While it is true that pockets of resistance to the decipherment persisted until surprisingly late, the alleged scholarly division seems overstated for the mid-1960s, when major handbooks like those of Ventris and Chadwick, Vilborg, and Palmer were very much part of mainstream scholarship. However that may be, a decision was finally reached to incorporate Mycenaean Greek forms into the 1996 Revised Supplement. This chapter takes stock of that decision so as to assess some aspects of its implementation in LSJ Supplement, and then considers what this may mean for the treatment of Mycenaean Greek in future editions.","PeriodicalId":145473,"journal":{"name":"Liddell and Scott","volume":"23 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2019-10-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"126396847","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2019-10-17DOI: 10.1093/oso/9780198810803.003.0008
C. Rowe
This chapter focuses on two particular aspects of the back history of Liddell and Scott (LSJ). First, Plato is, for LSJ, still one of the most important writers of ‘the best’ Attic prose, as he was, for its predecessors, of ‘correct’ Attic; he tends to be one of the benchmarks for Attic usage. But secondly, at the same time LSJ typically treats Plato as belonging to a breed apart: that of the Philosopher, with his own technical or semi-technical vocabulary, his own special ‘philosophical’ ways of thinking, as if these were quite separate from those of non-’philosophical’ authors. The chief purpose of the chapter is to illustrate some of the difficulties attaching to these two approaches, both of which are rooted firmly in earlier editions, stretching back even to the first in 1843.
{"title":"Philosophy and Linguistic Authority","authors":"C. Rowe","doi":"10.1093/oso/9780198810803.003.0008","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780198810803.003.0008","url":null,"abstract":"This chapter focuses on two particular aspects of the back history of Liddell and Scott (LSJ). First, Plato is, for LSJ, still one of the most important writers of ‘the best’ Attic prose, as he was, for its predecessors, of ‘correct’ Attic; he tends to be one of the benchmarks for Attic usage. But secondly, at the same time LSJ typically treats Plato as belonging to a breed apart: that of the Philosopher, with his own technical or semi-technical vocabulary, his own special ‘philosophical’ ways of thinking, as if these were quite separate from those of non-’philosophical’ authors. The chief purpose of the chapter is to illustrate some of the difficulties attaching to these two approaches, both of which are rooted firmly in earlier editions, stretching back even to the first in 1843.","PeriodicalId":145473,"journal":{"name":"Liddell and Scott","volume":"1 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2019-10-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"129283833","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2019-10-17DOI: 10.1093/oso/9780198810803.003.0017
M. Silk
Poetic language in the Western traditions subsumes two distinct categories of usage: elevation (whereby usage conforms to a conventional ‘high style’) and heightening (whereby meaning is enriched, often by mechanisms of defamiliarization). How should a historical dictionary of a dead language deal with literary, especially poetic, language? This chapter attempts to clarify the issues and sets out some principles for ‘literary lexicography’, with special reference to Liddell and Scott (LSJ) and ancient Greek poetry, and to Greek usage in the early and classical periods. The issues dealt with apply equally to Liddell and Scott and the Revised Supplement; for the most part the discussion will subsume both.
{"title":"Literary Lexicography","authors":"M. Silk","doi":"10.1093/oso/9780198810803.003.0017","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780198810803.003.0017","url":null,"abstract":"Poetic language in the Western traditions subsumes two distinct categories of usage: elevation (whereby usage conforms to a conventional ‘high style’) and heightening (whereby meaning is enriched, often by mechanisms of defamiliarization). How should a historical dictionary of a dead language deal with literary, especially poetic, language? This chapter attempts to clarify the issues and sets out some principles for ‘literary lexicography’, with special reference to Liddell and Scott (LSJ) and ancient Greek poetry, and to Greek usage in the early and classical periods. The issues dealt with apply equally to Liddell and Scott and the Revised Supplement; for the most part the discussion will subsume both.","PeriodicalId":145473,"journal":{"name":"Liddell and Scott","volume":"8 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2019-10-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"127605316","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2019-10-17DOI: 10.1093/oso/9780198810803.003.0011
M. Janse
Liddell and Scott (LSJ) has always been entitled A Greek-English Lexicon, from the first (1843) through to the ninth edition (1940). Clearly no need was felt to add Ancient to the title, even though LSJ is not and never was intended to be a comprehensive lexicon of the Greek language in its entire history. This chapter asks whether the scope of Ancient should be extended to include later stages, particularly the Medieval and the Modern, given the remarkable continuity of the Greek language stressed by Chantraine and others. With the availability of the online LSJ this is an option which should be seriously considered, although the editorial problems of a continuously updated online version may seem forbidding.β
{"title":"The Ancient, the Medieval, and the Modern in a Greek-English Lexicon, or How To Get Your Daily ‘Bread’ in Greek Any Day Through the Ages","authors":"M. Janse","doi":"10.1093/oso/9780198810803.003.0011","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780198810803.003.0011","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000 Liddell and Scott (LSJ) has always been entitled A Greek-English Lexicon, from the first (1843) through to the ninth edition (1940). Clearly no need was felt to add Ancient to the title, even though LSJ is not and never was intended to be a comprehensive lexicon of the Greek language in its entire history. This chapter asks whether the scope of Ancient should be extended to include later stages, particularly the Medieval and the Modern, given the remarkable continuity of the Greek language stressed by Chantraine and others. With the availability of the online LSJ this is an option which should be seriously considered, although the editorial problems of a continuously updated online version may seem forbidding.β","PeriodicalId":145473,"journal":{"name":"Liddell and Scott","volume":"26 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2019-10-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"117108718","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2019-10-17DOI: 10.1093/oso/9780198810803.003.0018
M. Meier-Brügger
The Lexikon des frühgriechischen Epos (LfgrE) was founded by Bruno Snell after World War II at the University of Hamburg. The chapter’s author was responsible for LfgrE from 1984 until its completion in 2010. The focus of LfgrE is the lexical semantics of the words and the semantic fields that each one occupies. This chapter presents the author’s reflections on some of the lessons learned in those years of working on the Lexikon. It presents a sample set of case studies to check the quality of the information presented in Liddell and Scott against the results obtained during the author’s life-long research in the field of Greek lexicography, with an emphasis on early epic.
{"title":"Lessons Learned During my Time at the Lexikon des frühgriechischen Epos","authors":"M. Meier-Brügger","doi":"10.1093/oso/9780198810803.003.0018","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780198810803.003.0018","url":null,"abstract":"The Lexikon des frühgriechischen Epos (LfgrE) was founded by Bruno Snell after World War II at the University of Hamburg. The chapter’s author was responsible for LfgrE from 1984 until its completion in 2010. The focus of LfgrE is the lexical semantics of the words and the semantic fields that each one occupies. This chapter presents the author’s reflections on some of the lessons learned in those years of working on the Lexikon. It presents a sample set of case studies to check the quality of the information presented in Liddell and Scott against the results obtained during the author’s life-long research in the field of Greek lexicography, with an emphasis on early epic.","PeriodicalId":145473,"journal":{"name":"Liddell and Scott","volume":"52 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2019-10-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"117036016","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2019-10-17DOI: 10.1093/oso/9780198810803.003.0001
C. Stray
‘Liddell and Scott has become so familiar to scholars of Greek that they tend to take it for granted. However, behind this monumental and impartial familiarity is a complex history of scholarly controversy and commercial book production. This chapter sets the first eight editions of the Lexicon (1843–97) in a number of contemporary contexts: the institutional and intellectual world of Oxford in the 1830s and 1840s; the emergence of classical dictionaries using vernaculars rather than Latin for glosses; the relationship of the Lexicon with other dictionaries; the development of the book through successive editions and abridgements; the reputation of the Lexicon; and its printing and publishing history. The chapter aims to explore these separate contexts, and to suggest how they interacted.
{"title":"Liddell and Scott in Historical Context","authors":"C. Stray","doi":"10.1093/oso/9780198810803.003.0001","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780198810803.003.0001","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000 ‘Liddell and Scott has become so familiar to scholars of Greek that they tend to take it for granted. However, behind this monumental and impartial familiarity is a complex history of scholarly controversy and commercial book production. This chapter sets the first eight editions of the Lexicon (1843–97) in a number of contemporary contexts: the institutional and intellectual world of Oxford in the 1830s and 1840s; the emergence of classical dictionaries using vernaculars rather than Latin for glosses; the relationship of the Lexicon with other dictionaries; the development of the book through successive editions and abridgements; the reputation of the Lexicon; and its printing and publishing history. The chapter aims to explore these separate contexts, and to suggest how they interacted.","PeriodicalId":145473,"journal":{"name":"Liddell and Scott","volume":"23 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2019-10-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"125957514","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2019-10-17DOI: 10.1093/oso/9780198810803.003.0010
Patrick James
This chapter presents the story of the treatment of the Greek of the New Testament in the Lexicon alongside a critical assessment of that treatment. It examines the internal evidence of a selection of entries for words attested in the New Testament as well as the external evidence from discussions of the Lexicon (including, for the present purpose, the various Prefaces). The chapter focuses on the development from the eighth edition of Liddell and Scott (LS8) to LSJ. LSJ marked something of a new beginning, not only in its coverage but also in its approach both to the New Testament’s vocabulary and to its Greek in general. By contrast, LS7 was in effect reprinted as LS8, the last edition from Liddell himself.
{"title":"The Greek of the New Testament","authors":"Patrick James","doi":"10.1093/oso/9780198810803.003.0010","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780198810803.003.0010","url":null,"abstract":"This chapter presents the story of the treatment of the Greek of the New Testament in the Lexicon alongside a critical assessment of that treatment. It examines the internal evidence of a selection of entries for words attested in the New Testament as well as the external evidence from discussions of the Lexicon (including, for the present purpose, the various Prefaces). The chapter focuses on the development from the eighth edition of Liddell and Scott (LS8) to LSJ. LSJ marked something of a new beginning, not only in its coverage but also in its approach both to the New Testament’s vocabulary and to its Greek in general. By contrast, LS7 was in effect reprinted as LS8, the last edition from Liddell himself.","PeriodicalId":145473,"journal":{"name":"Liddell and Scott","volume":"53 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2019-10-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"133657040","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 1900-01-01DOI: 10.1093/oso/9780198810803.003.0013
E. Bracke
This chapter explores the tension running through the nine editions by focusing on the development of one particular entry, that for μῆτις. This term is best known from the 1974 book by Marcel Detienne and Jean-Pierre Vernant, Les ruses de l’intelligence: la métis des Grecs, still widely regarded as authoritative The ambiguity inherent in ruses—also present in the English title ‘cunning intelligence’—stands in contrast to LSJ’s broader definition as, firstly, ‘wisdom, skill, craft’, and, secondly, ‘counsel, plan, undertaking’. The chapter therefore sets out to explore both the intratextual tensions within the various editions of Liddell and Scott as well as the outward tensions between the Lexicon and contemporary scholarship.
本章通过关注一个特定条目的发展来探讨贯穿九个版本的紧张关系，即μ τις (ς))。这个词最为人所知的是1974年Marcel Detienne和Jean-Pierre Vernant所著的《Les ruses del ' intelligence: la m tis des希腊人》，这本书至今仍被广泛认为是权威的。“诡计”固有的模糊性——也出现在英文标题“狡猾的情报”中——与LSJ更广泛的定义形成鲜明对比，首先是“智慧、技能、工艺”，其次是“建议、计划、事业”。因此，本章开始探索在利德尔和斯科特的不同版本的文本内的紧张关系，以及词典和当代学术之间的外部紧张关系。
{"title":"Between Cunning and Chaos","authors":"E. Bracke","doi":"10.1093/oso/9780198810803.003.0013","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780198810803.003.0013","url":null,"abstract":"This chapter explores the tension running through the nine editions by focusing on the development of one particular entry, that for μῆτις. This term is best known from the 1974 book by Marcel Detienne and Jean-Pierre Vernant, Les ruses de l’intelligence: la métis des Grecs, still widely regarded as authoritative The ambiguity inherent in ruses—also present in the English title ‘cunning intelligence’—stands in contrast to LSJ’s broader definition as, firstly, ‘wisdom, skill, craft’, and, secondly, ‘counsel, plan, undertaking’. The chapter therefore sets out to explore both the intratextual tensions within the various editions of Liddell and Scott as well as the outward tensions between the Lexicon and contemporary scholarship.","PeriodicalId":145473,"journal":{"name":"Liddell and Scott","volume":"132 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"1900-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"124638920","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：