![]() ![]() Unless otherwise indicated, all the English translations of Anselms writings. In law, it may refer to the proprietary principle of Cuius est solum, eius est usque ad. But how about translating that sentence, i.e. ideo si praescit deus aliquid, necesse est illud esse futurum (DC I, 3)4. description: Or, from Heaven all the way to the center of the Earth. "intra sextum mensem") why it does not make sense to use a translation such as you suggest "comets remain for six months each." You may recall that comets just don't do that! And I certainly agree with you that "comets remain for the months of old" does not make any sense either. I have already explained at some length in another thread in this forum (cf. The question is: What makes sense in real terms and what does not? necesse est ut ad memoriam revocetis, quid scripserit sanctus Paulus. Homo nemo damnari poterit, si iussum, quod ipso hoc tempore aut ex domestico iure aut. Quotquot cupiunt participes fieri sacr Communionis, indicabunt nomina sua Pastori. Et ut des ei aliquam aduocationem, quod fieri nullo modo potest. hominis iura perspecto et cognito legum regimine defendi necesse. And of course I totally agree with you that the sentence as written by Seneca has to make sense. 5 quae cum ita sint, primum, quod in tanta dimicatione capitis, famae fortunarumque omnium fieri necesse est, ab Iove optimo maximo ceterisque dis. The above translation would seem even more sensible if the 2nd of Senecas passages above. That fact considered, what would be more natural than referencing prior comets, and the months associated with each of those comets, in terms of the rulers whose demise was closely related to this or that comet? Accordingly I see quite a natural linguistic association between a comet, the month(s) of such a comet, and the ruler being associated with such a comet. Celestial events were, as you know, in those days very closely associated with omens relating to then current rulers. Seneca was Nero's appointed teacher and could potentially reference himself as "the old man," or, more likely perhaps, Seneca could be giving reference to either Nero's predecessor on the throne, Claudius, or even to Nero's father, or perhaps even more likely, he could have used the Latin term as the English term "the ancients" is being used, or what do you think? Is such usage at all impossible from a grammatical and linguistic point of view?3. ![]() For instance, consider this: Nero was at the time of this writing (about 47 CE (sic) ) only about 28 years old, quite a young man. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |