Talk:De Interpretatione

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Philosophy Portal

This article is within the scope of the Philosophy WikiProject, which collaborates on articles related to philosophy and the history of ideas. Please read the instructions and standards for writing and maintaining philosophy articles. To participate, you can edit this article or visit the project page for more details.

Stub

This article has been rated as stub-Class on the Project's quality scale.
(If you rated the article please give a short summary at comments to explain the ratings and/or to identify the strengths and weaknesses.)

[edit] a MAJOR issue still to be treated here

what's the relation among name, thought, thing? A problem discussed extensively by each and every medieval philosopher (boethius being the first to write about it in latin). Aristotle Int. 1: "names are symbols for the affections in the soul, and these are symbols for the things" or something like that. One of the most perplexing features of this short treatise...

--zuben 10:01, 4 September 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Proposed move to De Interpretatione

The article for every other work by Aristotle (as listed at Aristotle and Bekker numbers) bears the name that is used in the Revised Oxford Translation (ed. Jonathan Barnes, Princeton University Press, 1984). This is as close to a standard for referring to Aristotle's works in English as I believe one could find. I myself would prefer different names in several cases, but at Wikipedia I think using this reference is better because it gives us a neutral standard. In the Revised Oxford Translation, all the titles are in English except for De Interpretatione and Magna Moralia. In other words, the ROT shows a strong tendency to English not Latin, even for treatises like De motu animalium (Movement of Animals) that (in my experience) a great many English-speakers refer to in Latin. Indeed, an awful lot of English-speaking scholars do refer to the "De Interpretatione," and the Wikipedia naming conventions do envision a case like this, where a "form is more commonly recognized by readers than the English form." (By the way, this article originally was at De Interpretatione; there's no clear reason why it was ever moved here.) Wareh 19:10, 23 February 2007 (UTC)

And this is much more likely to be unambiguous; there are at least half-a-dozen other books with this title (all of them also have a subtitle, but will that last?) Septentrionalis PMAnderson 20:20, 23 February 2007 (UTC)

Support the move. I feel somewhat uncomfortable with using a Latin title for a Greek work, but I see the point of having a standard for Aristotelian titles, plus De Interpretatione is traditional and recognizable. --Akhilleus (talk) 05:53, 27 February 2007 (UTC)

Comment. I'm willing to make the move, but, for consistency, which other articles from Category:Works_of_Aristotle should be moved as well? They are all in English currently, and most are substubs. Duja► 11:26, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

Thanks. None of the others need a move—they are all already named according to the standard I mention here. Wareh 15:57, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

Support the move per Wareh's rationale. Deor 16:13, 1 March 2007 (UTC)