Informacja

Drogi użytkowniku, aplikacja do prawidłowego działania wymaga obsługi JavaScript. Proszę włącz obsługę JavaScript w Twojej przeglądarce.

English (EN)·Polski (PL)·Yкраїнський (UK)
Przejdź do strony domowej biblioteki Centralna Biblioteka Wojskowa Link otwiera się w nowym oknie Logo biblioteki Prolib Integro - strona głównaCentralna Biblioteka Wojskowa

Wyszukujesz frazę "Herodotus of Halicarnassus" wg kryterium: Temat

  Lista filtrów
Wyrównaj
    Wyświetlanie 1-4 z 4
    Tytuł:
    O Herodotowej narracji w świetle oralności
    On Herodotus’ Narration in the Light of Orality
    Autorzy:
    Wieżel, Iwona
    Powiązania:
    https://bibliotekanauki.pl/articles/1944395.pdf
    Data publikacji:
    2009
    Wydawca:
    Katolicki Uniwersytet Lubelski Jana Pawła II. Towarzystwo Naukowe KUL
    Tematy:
    Herodot z Halikarnasu
    Dzieje
    narracja
    literatura oralna
    kompozycja oralna
    Herodotus of Halicarnassus
    Histories
    narration
    oral literature
    oral composition
    Opis:
    This paper consists of four parts. The first one provides a short commentary on the oral tradition of the Histories, and the second, third, and fourth parts focus on the analysis of some passages of Herodotus’ work in view of his oral discourse. Consequently, the following categories of Herodotus’ poetics are discussed: the compositional structure of the work, the mutual relations of its components, i.e. plots, episodes etc. and the narrator’s construction. The last part contains a brief recapitulation of the results in several points:— Herodotus shapes the events and heroes in his History in view of the figures provided by oral literature, i.e. he confers on them a heroic dimension that intends them be remembered and honoured. This is especially so in the parts that are strictly stories. Herodotus here plays the role of a third-person narrator. His narration is more discrete, allusive, and dramatised through which he wishes to reach a broader audience that is accustomed to rapsodic competitions and theatrical performances popular in those days;—The narration of the Histories is based on the episodic structure composed of a series of brief stories linked with one another by means of sentences. These sentences trace the direction of the story, and this in turn orientate the story-teller and listener to a more complete reception of the verbal message;—The narration of the Histories additionally contains stereotypical thematic lines, together with a schematic structure of plots and a typological image of figures. This enables their multiple usage in the process of oral and spontaneous presentation of parts of the work.
    Źródło:
    Roczniki Humanistyczne; 2009, 57, 3; 87-115
    0035-7707
    Pojawia się w:
    Roczniki Humanistyczne
    Dostawca treści:
    Biblioteka Nauki
    Artykuł
    Tytuł:
    „Mądry doradca”. Analiza strukturalno-genetyczna wątku fabularnego w Dziejach Herodota
    “The Wise Adviser”. The Structural and Genetic Analysis of the Narrative Plot in the Histories of Herodotus
    Autorzy:
    Domańska, Iwona
    Powiązania:
    https://bibliotekanauki.pl/articles/2127736.pdf
    Data publikacji:
    2007
    Wydawca:
    Katolicki Uniwersytet Lubelski Jana Pawła II. Towarzystwo Naukowe KUL
    Tematy:
    Herodot z Halikarnasu
    Dzieje
    fabuła
    wątek
    struktura
    narracja
    kompozycja oralna
    Herodotus of Halicarnassus
    Histories
    plot
    structure
    narrative
    oral composition
    Opis:
    The article consists of three parts: the first which illustrates the particular structure of the plot stated in the title, the second which explains the origin of the structure of the plot and the third which summarizes the whole content. In the first part, after analyzing 26 examples of the plot taken from Herodotus’ Histories, it is possible to sketch the structural pattern of “the wise adviser” plot. It depicts the so-called patterns of history that are executed in the characters and events within the narrative. Moreover, those patterns are characteristic of the Herodotean narrative as such. They can bring to mind the technique of “ring-composition” discerned in the Homeric poems the Iliad and the Odyssey and also in the Histories of Herodotus. The second part of the article concentrates on the origin of the structure of “the wise adviser” plot. That is, it attempts to give the answer on the question of how and why the plot was moulded the way it was. This problem is explained by the Havelock’s “oral rules” applied to the oral work and composition and also by the Ong’s “memory rules”. On their basis it is allowed to name the Herodotean narrative as the “oral narrative” that meets the expectations of the oral communication in the strict narrative genre. The third part summarizes the preceding parts and draws some conclusions.
    Źródło:
    Roczniki Humanistyczne; 2007, 54-55, 3; 213-223
    0035-7707
    Pojawia się w:
    Roczniki Humanistyczne
    Dostawca treści:
    Biblioteka Nauki
    Artykuł
    Tytuł:
    Kilka przykładów metafizycznej przyczynowości konfliktów zbrojnych w Dziejach Herodota z Halikarnasu
    Some Insights into the Metaphysical Causation of the Warfare within the Herodotean Histories
    Autorzy:
    Domańska, Iwona
    Powiązania:
    https://bibliotekanauki.pl/articles/1953976.pdf
    Data publikacji:
    2004
    Wydawca:
    Katolicki Uniwersytet Lubelski Jana Pawła II. Towarzystwo Naukowe KUL
    Tematy:
    Herodot z Halikarnasu
    Dzieje
    wojna
    przyczyna
    człowiek
    bóstwo
    przeznaczenie
    kara
    Herodotus of Halicarnassus
    Histories
    warfare
    cause
    human
    divinity
    fate
    retribution
    Opis:
    Human and divine spheres of activity continuously alternate each other within the pages of the Herodotean Histories – they take the shape of a constant struggle between the two “world ends”. This struggle materializes in the lot of particular characters like Croesus’ or Xerxes’ rise and fall, when the kings try in vain to stand up to supernatural powers, which have already prepared their own blueprint of the earthly history. Furthermore, it materializes in the figure of wise adviser, who becomes as if the embodiment of human attempts to free oneself from the dim dictatorship of the jealous deity. Finally, it is revealed in the very moment of making crucial decisions. Dreams and oracles, as they appeare, serve the role of specific devices in the hands of divine and also the most approachable way for human discovery of the fated future. The consistent theology within Histories does not exist at all. Herodotus’ conviction (given expressis verbis or put in the mouth of his characters) about the existence of fate, ruling even the gods, about divine retribution – τίσις – or about the jealousy of the deities – φϑόνος, are ingrained into the religious thinking of Herodotus’ time. For he belonged, even by virtue of his pedigree, to the world of religious conservatism, comparable to that of Aeschylus, Sophocles, or other Greek thinkers of the Vth-century Hellade.
    Źródło:
    Roczniki Humanistyczne; 2004, 52, 3; 109-129
    0035-7707
    Pojawia się w:
    Roczniki Humanistyczne
    Dostawca treści:
    Biblioteka Nauki
    Artykuł
    Tytuł:
    The ‘Archeology’ of historiography as a rhetorical agon. On the juxtaposition of hellenic writers in the Epistula ad Pompeium by Dionysius of Halicarnassus
    „Archeologia” historiografii jako retoryczna gra. O porównaniu greckich autorów w „Liście do Pompeiusza” Dinizjosa z Halikarnasu
    Autorzy:
    Sinitsyn, Aleksandr
    Powiązania:
    https://bibliotekanauki.pl/articles/2033826.pdf
    Data publikacji:
    2021-12-28
    Wydawca:
    Łódzkie Towarzystwo Naukowe
    Tematy:
    Dionysius of Halicarnassus
    “A Letter to Pompeius”
    historiography
    rhetoric
    early Greek historians Hellanicus
    Charon
    Herodotus
    Thucydides
    Xenophon
    Philistus
    Theopompus
    style
    syngraphers
    Plato
    philosophy
    ancient Greek orators Lysias
    Demosthenes
    literary criticism
    polylogue
    agon
    influence
    Dionizjos z Halikarnasu
    „List do Pompeiusza”
    historiografia
    retoryka
    wcześni historycy greccy – Hellanikos
    Herodot
    Tukidydes
    Ksenofont
    Filistos
    Teopompos
    oratorzy
    Lysias
    Demostenes
    krytyka literacka
    Opis:
    Dionysius of Halicarnassus in his short theoretical treatise entitled “A Letter to Pompeius” (Epistula ad Pompeium) presents an exciting discussion on rhetoric mastership and scholarship written in an epistolary genre. The treatise begins with critical remarks Dionysius once addressed to Plato. The author admits to his addressee (Cn. Pompeius Geminus) that he is enchanted by Plato’s dialogues. From the trio of Greek speech-makers who are recognized as the most brilliant in this respect – Isocrates, Plato, and Demosthenes (such was Dionysius’s selection) – the Halicarnassean rhetorician deliberately dwells on Plato (Lysias, Isocrates, Demosthenes and other Greek orators are the subject of his other aesthetic works). Embarking on a wider discussion, Dionysius repeatedly points out that these studies are always aimed at establishing the truth. The longest chapter, 3 compares works of the first Greek historians and the mastery of their style. Dionysius points out the rivalry of the many masters of the genre, but the main characters of the chapter are Herodotus and Thucydides. The “father of history” (Dionysius’ contemporary and paragon) surpasses the Athenian historian on all counts examined by the author. This article examines συγγραφεύς / συγγραφεῖς or συγγραφή occurring in the Pomp. by Dionysius of Halicarnassus. The rhetorician, when referring to Herodotus, Thucydides (ch. 3), Theopompus (ch. 6), Hellanicus, Charon (3.7) and the Greek historians en masse (6.7), calls them “syngraphers”. Dionysius uses the word συγγραφή only as applied to historical works of Theopompus of Chios (6.2, 3, 6). The article also draws upon the Halicarnassian philologist’s other works in which he mentions syngraphers-historians, who are set off against poets and orators. Dionysius regards the words συγγραφεύς, ὁ ἱστορικός, ἱστοριογράφος as equivalent and interchangeable. In this work, Dionysius examines different styles of ancient writers. Here, by examining the works by the authors of the 5th and 4th centuries BC (written three to four centuries before his time) he seems to be performing a peculiar experiment of theoretical “archaeology”. But the rhetoric and philological “archaeological” study conducted by Dionysius of Halicarnassus reveals not only his scholarly interest in the analysis of works of the writers of the past, but also his focus on the present – both in literary and cultural aspects. Plato is under the influence of Thucydides, but Thucydides is inferior to Herodotus, Herodotus produces works that surpass those of Charon and Hellanicus, while Theopompus is superior in style to Demosthenes himself and surpasses Isocrates – the “most brilliant” rhetoricians of the past. By presenting this gallery of names, Dionysius shows comparison as agon – of styles, genres, authors, their subject matters, intensive narrative, and he himself contends with the writers of the past. Seeing mastery of rhetoric as a peculiar agon stretching over centuries and across the agon of rhetoricians, philosophers and historiographers, Dionysius identifies the circle of best writers, and himself joins it. He claims that in the scholarly rhetoric “the truth is dearer still” and establishes the criteria to judge the classic writers. And the critic realizes that he will be judged according to the same (his own) criteria
    Dionizjos z Halikarnasu w teoretycznym traktacie zatytułowanym „List do Pompejusza” zawarł dyskusję na temat retorycznego mistrzostwa i nauki. Traktat rozpoczynają krytyczne uwagi Dionizjosa, adresowane do Platona. Autor przyznaje jednak, iż jest zachwycony dziełami Platona. Pośród trzech greckich mówców, uznawanych za najwybitniejszych – Izokratesa, Platona, Demostenesa – Dionizjos z Halikarnasu celowo studiuje Platona. Prowadzi szeroką dyskusję. Dionizjos wielokrotnie podkreśla, że wskazani autorzy mają na celu ustalenie prawdy. Najdłuższy rozdział oznaczony jako 3, dotyczy historyków greckich i stylu ich prac. Dionizjos zauważa rywalizacje mistrzów, ale głównymi bohaterami rozdziału stali się Herodot i Tukidydes. Dinozjos zauważa, że „ojciec historii” przewyższa ateńskiego historyka. Prezentowany artykuł dotyczy użycia słowa συγγγραφεύς. Słowa tego retor użył w odniesieniu do Herodota, Tukidydesa, Hellanikosa i innych historyków. Dionizjos wskazuje na styl autorów, tematykę ich prac.
    Źródło:
    Acta Archaeologica Lodziensia; 2021, 67; 89-115
    0065-0986
    2451-0300
    Pojawia się w:
    Acta Archaeologica Lodziensia
    Dostawca treści:
    Biblioteka Nauki
    Artykuł
      Wyświetlanie 1-4 z 4

      Ta witryna wykorzystuje pliki cookies do przechowywania informacji na Twoim komputerze. Pliki cookies stosujemy w celu świadczenia usług na najwyższym poziomie, w tym w sposób dostosowany do indywidualnych potrzeb. Korzystanie z witryny bez zmiany ustawień dotyczących cookies oznacza, że będą one zamieszczane w Twoim komputerze. W każdym momencie możesz dokonać zmiany ustawień dotyczących cookies