伪提奥菲勒转述理论的起源

Fernando Reinoso-Barbero
{"title":"伪提奥菲勒转述理论的起源","authors":"Fernando Reinoso-Barbero","doi":"10.1163/15718190-20233404","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<h2>Summary</h2><p><em>Origin of the theory about the Pseudo-Theophilus’ Paraphrase</em>. – The sudden and abrupt change in Contardo Ferrini’s stance towards Theophilus, is attributed here to the misinterpretation of a letter sent to him by Zachariä von Lingenthal on January 31, 1884, just as his magnificent edition of the Paraphrase was on the brink of publication. This circumstance compels him to hastily modify and adapt its <em>Prolegomena</em> to his new theory, leading to significant unforeseen consequences. Furthermore, due to the rush, he also overlooks making modifications in other sections of his edition where, for this reason, Theophilus is still acknowledged as the author of the Paraphrase.</p>","PeriodicalId":501512,"journal":{"name":"The Legal History Review","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-12-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Origen de la teoría sobre la Paráfrasis del Pseudo-Teófilo\",\"authors\":\"Fernando Reinoso-Barbero\",\"doi\":\"10.1163/15718190-20233404\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<h2>Summary</h2><p><em>Origin of the theory about the Pseudo-Theophilus’ Paraphrase</em>. – The sudden and abrupt change in Contardo Ferrini’s stance towards Theophilus, is attributed here to the misinterpretation of a letter sent to him by Zachariä von Lingenthal on January 31, 1884, just as his magnificent edition of the Paraphrase was on the brink of publication. This circumstance compels him to hastily modify and adapt its <em>Prolegomena</em> to his new theory, leading to significant unforeseen consequences. Furthermore, due to the rush, he also overlooks making modifications in other sections of his edition where, for this reason, Theophilus is still acknowledged as the author of the Paraphrase.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":501512,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"The Legal History Review\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-12-22\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"The Legal History Review\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1163/15718190-20233404\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The Legal History Review","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1163/15718190-20233404","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

摘要关于伪提奥菲洛斯转述的理论起源。- 康塔多-费里尼对提阿非罗的态度之所以会突然转变,是因为他在 1884 年 1 月 31 日误读了扎卡里亚-冯-林根塔尔寄给他的一封信,而当时他的宏伟版本《释义》正濒临出版。这种情况迫使他匆忙修改《序言》并使之适应他的新理论,从而导致了无法预料的重大后果。此外,由于时间仓促,他还忽略了对版本中其他部分的修改,因此,提奥菲勒斯仍被认为是《释义》的作者。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Origen de la teoría sobre la Paráfrasis del Pseudo-Teófilo

Summary

Origin of the theory about the Pseudo-Theophilus’ Paraphrase. – The sudden and abrupt change in Contardo Ferrini’s stance towards Theophilus, is attributed here to the misinterpretation of a letter sent to him by Zachariä von Lingenthal on January 31, 1884, just as his magnificent edition of the Paraphrase was on the brink of publication. This circumstance compels him to hastily modify and adapt its Prolegomena to his new theory, leading to significant unforeseen consequences. Furthermore, due to the rush, he also overlooks making modifications in other sections of his edition where, for this reason, Theophilus is still acknowledged as the author of the Paraphrase.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Donationem non facit? Donations to people in potestate of the donor in Roman law Private legal practice and public authority in early Venetian Ithaca: thirteen new notarial documents (1575–1599) ‘Scriptura recepta et usitata’: The impact of the Lex citandi on Justinian’s Digest The issue of sexuality in Italian penitentiary law: a 1930s debate between international influences and fascist prison policies Is legal history just writing a text?
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1