Andrzej Probulski

The first part of 1683 De optimo genere interpretandi sets the scene for Huet’s dialogue and introduces its participants: Isaac Casaubon (1559–1614) is comissioned to lay out his principles of translation, while Fronton du Duc (1558–1624) and Jacques Auguste de Thou (1553–1617) are meant to evaluate his views and ask questions regarding Casaubon’s theses. Casaubon’s lecture begins with a definition of interpretatio as sermo lingua notiore expressus, sermonem lingua minus nota expressum referens ac repraesentans (“a discourse in expressed in a better known language, referring to and representing a discourse in a lesser known language”), which is then followed by remarks separating interpretatio from such terms as aemulatio and paraphrasis. The speakers then discuss the principles of “the best kind of translation” in regard to Casaubon’s notion that the strict semantic, lexical and stylistic accuracy should be preffered by the translators over “appropriating” (convertere) the ancient authors to suit the tastes of the contemporaries. After those basic principles are given, Casaubon, de Thou and du Duc reflect on problems posed by the Casaubon’s approach to translation: mainly, the differences between particular languages, the lexical discrepancies and the difficulties regarding use of Casaubon’s method to different categories of texts (e.g. How important is it to represent the style of the original in the case of scientific texts?).

tłum. Andrzej Probulski 

RECENZJA: Krzysztof Obremski, Literatura staropolska czytana współczesną humanistyką. Przymiarki metodologiczne

Wydawnictwo Naukowe UMK, Toruń 2012, ss. 198

The city on a rhetorical foundation
The article is a review of Jakub Niedźwiedź’s latest book concerning literacy in medieval and early modern Vilnius. The author analyzes the notion of ‘the rhetorical organization of the city’ employed by Niedźwiedź in his book and points out some consequences stemming from the way such notions as ‘text’ and ‘rhetoric’ are used in it. The reviewer also emphasizes the signifi cance of the book as both a statement in the discussion concerning the dematerialization of the text in modern literary studies and as a work that may inspire a number of similar research projects.

The article aims to present a new interpretation of Stanisław Herakliusz Lubomirski’s De vanitate consiliorum by discussing the way the Latin notion of prudentia and the two-fold argument (disputatio in utramque partem) are employed in the dialogue.
The first part of the article briefly discusses the origin and meanings of prudentia as it was employed in the Ciceronian tradition. The notion of prudence as practical judgement in relation to affairs of state is linked here to the Ciceronian mode of arguing in utramque partem, allowing a careful examination of different aspects of any given issue before taking political action.
The second part of the article outlines the ways the notion of prudence is used throughout De vanitate consiliorum. Prudentia is referred to by the characters of the dialogue as a faculty that allows the statesman to make the best of contradictory forces influencing the course of political affairs – a faculty which does not ensure success, but allows one to achieve the best possible result in the contingent sphere of human affairs.
The third and final part of the article discusses the two ways the image of ‘two-headed prudence’ is invoked in De vanitate consiliorum, either in reference to the prudent judgement which carefully examines different aspects of the issue at hand or to the council’s indecisiveness which hinders the possibility of consensus necessary to take political action. An interpretation of the dialogue as a rhetorical exercise in prudence is proposed in this part, arguing that the way Lubomirski employs rhetorical deliberation in utramque partem invites the reader to constantly exercise his own practical judgement in relation to affairs of state.
 

Projekt został sfinansowany ze środków Narodowego Centrum Nauki przyznanych
na podstawie decyzji numer DEC-2012/07/N/HS2/00740

Recenzja: Victoria Kahn, The Future of Illusion: Political Theology and Early Modern Texts, The University of Chicago Press, Chicago-London 2014, s. 246.