Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
  1. Home
  2. Browse subjects
  3. Classical Studies
  4. Classical studies (general)
  5. Content listing

Refine search

Refine search

Access:
Content type:
Publication date:
Apply   From and To filters
Subject: Show more
Journals Show more
Publishers: Show more
Societies Show more
Series: Show more
Collections: Show more

Actions for selected content:

Select all | Deselect all
  • View selected items
  • Export citations
  • Download PDF (zip)
  • Save to Kindle
  • Save to Dropbox
  • Save to Google Drive

Save Search

You can save your searches here and later view and run them again in "My saved searches".

Please provide a title, maximum of 40 characters.
Cancel
×

60720 results in Classical studies (general)

Page 121 of 3036

  • 5 - Aspects of Audience Engagement

  • Kelly Iverson, Baylor University, Texas
  • Book:
    Performing Early Christian Literature
    Published online:
    24 September 2021
    Print publication:
    07 October 2021, pp 139-181

  • Summary

    Unlike readers, audiences in an oral culture have little recourse to a textual artifact. In the performance arena where narratives cannot be paused or rewound, memory plays a crucial role in audience experience. This chapter seeks to reexamine how biblical scholars have traditionally handled questions of intertextuality.

  • 3 - Aspects of Audience Engagement

  • Kelly Iverson, Baylor University, Texas
  • Book:
    Performing Early Christian Literature
    Published online:
    24 September 2021
    Print publication:
    07 October 2021, pp 53-92

  • Summary

    Few issues have been more neglected in the field of biblical studies than the role of emotions. Though the literary approach has led to profitable insights, the danger in studying the text as a chirographic artifact is that one may neglect to consider the emotional consequences that arise from the performative event. This chapter reflects on the importance of emotions, how they function in a performative context, and their interpretive impact in the study of the gospels (e.g., spotlighting attention, transferal of spiritual memes).

  • THE ‘POLITE’ AORIST: TENSE OR ASPECT?

  • Arjan A. Nijk
  • Journal:
    The Classical Quarterly / Volume 71 / Issue 2 / December 2021
    Published online by Cambridge University Press:
    28 September 2021, pp. 520-537
    Print publication:
    December 2021
    • Article
      • You have access
      • Open access
    • PDF
    • HTML
    • Export citation

  • This article investigates the semantics and pragmatics of the ‘hortative’ aorist (the aorist indicative in questions with τί οὐ ‘why don't …’) and the ‘tragic’ or ‘performative’ aorist (for example ὤμοσα ‘I swear’). Lloyd argued in 1999 that the tragic aorist is a more polite alternative for the corresponding present (ὄμνυμι ‘I swear’). Recently, he has extended this view to the hortative aorist, suggesting that, for example, τί οὐκ ἐκαλέσαμεν; is a polite alternative for τί οὐ καλοῦμεν; Lloyd argues that the politeness value of the aorist derives from its being a past tense, comparing the so-called ‘attitudinal’ past (as in I wanted to ask you something instead of I want to ask you something). The present article, building on work by Colvin, Bary and Nijk, argues instead that the semantic value of the aorist is purely aspectual in these cases: the hortative and tragic aorists serve to construe the designated event as bounded, while the corresponding present forms serve to construe the designated event as unbounded. An extensive discussion of the evidence for the hortative aorist and present is presented, as well as a case study concerning the aspectual behaviour of the verb ὄμνυμι. Moreover, I argue that the proposed semantic account of the hortative and tragic aorists in terms of aspect can be unified with Lloyd's pragmatic account in terms of politeness: the difference in tone between the present and the aorist can be derived from their respective aspectual values, rather than from their temporal values.

Performing Early Christian Literature
  • Audience Experience and Interpretation of the Gospels
  • Kelly Iverson
  • Published online:
    24 September 2021
    Print publication:
    07 October 2021
  • Scholars of early Christian literature acknowledge that oral traditions lie behind the New Testament gospels. While the concept of orality is widely accepted, it has not resulted in a corresponding effort to understand the reception of the gospels within their oral milieu. In this book, Kelly Iverson reconsiders the experiential context in which early Christian literature was received and interpreted. He argues that reading and performance are distinguishable media events, and, significantly, that they produce distinctive interpretive experiences for readers and audiences alike. Iverson marshals an array of methodological perspectives demonstrating how performance generates a unique experiential context that shapes and informs the interpretive process. Iverson's study explores the dynamic oral environment in which ancient audiences experienced the gospel stories. He shows why an understanding of oral performance has important implications for the study of the NT, as well as for several issues that are largely unquestioned by biblical scholars.

  • ON ARISTOTLE'S PERI HERMENEIAS 16A1–18: THE CASE OF AN ANONYMOUS ARMENIAN COMMENTARY

  • Geneviève Lachance
  • Journal:
    The Classical Quarterly / Volume 71 / Issue 2 / December 2021
    Published online by Cambridge University Press:
    24 September 2021, pp. 866-885
    Print publication:
    December 2021

  • The anonymous Armenian commentary was transmitted together with the Armenian translation of Aristotle's Peri Hermeneias (sixth century or earlier). It was composed in the Hellenizing style and commonly associated with the figure of David the Invincible, a philosopher of the Neoplatonic School of Alexandria. This article presents a general structural analysis of the commentary followed by a comparative study and translation of its first chapter. It argues that the commentary was indeed written in the tradition of late antique Greek commentaries but was probably not associated with late Neoplatonism. The Armenian commentary shares many common features with Ammonius’ commentary, but also departs from it on many crucial aspects. From a philosophical standpoint, it has much more in common with Boethius’ and Alexander of Aphrodisias’ commentaries than with those of the Neoplatonic School of Alexandria, thus suggesting an early writing date.

Page 121 of 3036