Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-t7czq Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-28T21:38:14.227Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Metaphorical Vocabulary of Dionysius of Halicarnassus1

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  11 February 2009

J. F. Lockwood
J. F. Lockwood
Affiliation:
University College, London
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

The method of approach to detailed criticism of prose-writers and poets adopted by Dionysius is in a large measure comparative. The procedure of comparison is threefold: firstly, the bringing together of passages from authors to elicit points of resemblance or of difference between their styles secondly, the assumption of the existence of common critical standards for all works of art, whether literature, painting, or sculpture thirdly, the use of metaphor and simile to illustrate matters of criticism which need the assistance of some visual or mental image to make clear the exact meaning of the point of criticism. The metaphorical vocabulary is the richer for the greater preoccupation of Dionysius with aesthetic appreciation than with philosophical analysis; and any seeming differences in technical vocabulary are compensated by the freedom with which his vocabulary in general draws on the Greek of his own and earlier times. The following list gives some of the more interesting metaphorical expressions used in the rhetorical works, with notes on their meaning and, in some cases, with illustrations of the use of the same or similar terms in other Greek critics and in the volumes of scholia.

Type
Research Article
Information
The Classical Quarterly , Volume 31 , Issue 3-4 , July 1937 , pp. 192 - 203
Copyright
Copyright © The Classical Association 1937

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

page 192 note 2 Cf. de Dem. 33 p. 202 ‘for I knew that it is impossible to obtain a clear conception of the true character of anything by a mere examination of the object itself’.

page 192 note 3 For the analogy of the arts in Dionysius, see de Itocr. 3 p. 59. de Isaeo 4 p. 96, de Dem. 41 p. 220, de Din. 7 p. 307, C.V. 21 p. 95, and especially C.V. 25 pp. 132 f. and de Dem. 51 pp. 240 ff. Music (e.g. de Dem. 22 pp. 176 f., 40 p. 216, C.V. 11 p. 40), and the ‘useful ’ arts (e.g. C.V. 2 p. 8, 6 p. 28, 21 p. 96) also play their part among analogies, as also do gymnastic, the human body, and the world of nature.

page 192 note 4 Goetzeler, Animadversiones in Dionysii Halicarnassensis Antiquitates Romanas, listed 101 words found only in the historical writings of Dionysius; this number can now be reduced to 92; delete ὰνιέρωσις, μονοУνώμων, πєριζωμάτιον, πєρΙκαυστος, πρόσπταισις, σιτόσπορος,συуκαταπίπτω, σʋνєισπορєύομαι, while άναУκοϕορέω (X 16), which is usually emended to άναукοϕαуέω, is perhaps a mistake for άναуκοτροϕέω. He listed also 254 words used for the first time in Dionysius; this number can be reduced to about 180 by the weeding out of technical or political terms of no literary significance, of translations of Latin, of wrongfully included words (notably έукατέϰω and κρєοκόπος, which is surprisingly translated ‘decoctor’), and the deletion of άδιακόσμητος, άκύρωσις, άνєισϕορία, άνέμβατος, δανєιστικός, δєκαєτΙα, διαπιπράσκω, ैख़ख़क़ख़॔ख़ॠडॅ, ैّॣॠॲॡ॓ॣ।ख़ॢ, ु॔ॕॅॖॠॡॳॗ३, ु॔ॠ॓॔ॡॅडॗ३, ुॗै॓ॅІ।॑ॖॅ, ुॗख़ॡॖृॐख़ॖॅ॓, ुॗ।ख़Іဈ॓ख़ॢ, ̀ॉॠ॓॔ॳॡ३ॣ॓ॢ, ुॠ॓ॖᄈॡृॐ३, ुॠ॓ॡॡॅॠІॐ३, Іै॓ख़ၙॗ३ॖख़ॗु३, Іॣख़।॓ॖІॅ, ॔ॅ॒॓ुॡ३ॣ॓ॢ, ॔ॅॕॳॆ॓ख़ॗ, ॕ॓ဈॗᄈॳ३, ॗॅ॥ॠ́॑႑॑ॣ॓ॢ, ख़ृॗᄀঁ॥।ख़ॢ, ɂॖख़ैृॅ॓।ख़ॢ, ॲॠॕख़ॠख़॓ॲॢ, ॠॅ॒ॅृॗख़ॖॅؗ, ॠᄈॡؗঁॲॆ३ဩ, ॠॡख़॔ॅ।ॅॗॅॕृॣ॔३, ॠॡख़ॣ॑ၙख़ॡؗႂॲॢ, ॣ।ॅॣؗॅख़।॑ॢ, (earlier in different sense), ॣ॥ॗीॣ॔॑ॣؗॢ, ॣ॥ॗै॓ॅॠख़ॡु३, ॣّॗᄈ႑႑ॡीঁ३, ।ॅॡॅ॔।॓॔ॲॢ. In the critical works I have found about 50 words cited only from Dionysius and about 100 cited as appearing first in him, while my word-list shows a very considerable number of words which appear only in Dionysius in a given sense, or which are used for the first time by Dionysius in a given sense. Even when due allowance is made for the gaps in our knowledge of the Greek vocabulary, it can be safely said that these figures confirm the description of Dionysius as ।̀॑ॗ ঁॡीॣ॓ॗ ॔ॅȶ ।7grave;॑ॗॕुक़॓ॗ ॔ॅ॓ॗख़ॠॡᄈॠूॢ by Phot, . bibl. cod. 83 p. 65AGoogle Scholar and the statement of Radermacher, (Rhein. Mus. 54 P 373)Google Scholar that Dionysius ‘schreibt kein attiscbes Griechisch’.

page 192 note 5 Latin equivalents are not discussed here; but I hope to treat of the relations of Greek and Latin critical terms in the lexicon of the vocabulary of ancient literary criticism which, on the advice of the late Professor Rhys Roberts, I am now engaged in preparing. It is a source of regret to me that the notes of Greilich and Geigenmuller on the vocabulary of Dionysius have been inaccessible.