Masterpieces of Metonymy: From Ancient Greek Times to Now by Gregory Nagy
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
BOOK REVIEWS/COMPTES RENDUS 407 identities. The author engages in an interesting discussion of several court cases cases where gossip may have played an important role. In the final section the author discusses whether fourth-century Athens was a catastrophically disrupted society, haunted by the trauma of the Peloponnesian war and the subsequent experience of tyranny. However, it must be noted that by the middle of the fourth century, when the cases Eidinow discusses went to trial, such memories would not have had the same affective power as they did in the first two decades of the century. Sometimes the reader is left wanting to know more, as for example on the role of gossip in the speech Against Euboulides, where it seems that the entire case against the citizenship of Euxitheos was based on nothing more than rumor. Likewise, one might want to hear more about the celebrity status of Phryne and how this could have evoked the poisonous phthonos which led to her prosecution. Some of the details of the court cases mentioned here contain small factual errors, as for example in the case against Neaira, where the prosecution was not one of graphe xenias but of purported marriage with a citizen, and Theogenes did not testify on the parentage of his wife. The document in 59.84 is undoubtedly a forgery, and I have argued elsewhere that he only testified on his divorce. I wish to note in particular that at 17, n. 24, Eidinow argues that the nominative of the name N”non is unknown and adopts the form Ninon (in the accusative), following the LGPN. However, the nominative of the name cannot be anything else except N”now (like the Assyrian city of Ninos, as in Str. 16.1.1, = N”now, Luc. Cont. 23.17 al.). It cannot be Nino (NinQ) because then the accusative would also be Nino, and it cannot have a neuter ending (= N”non), because feminine names with neuter endings are affectionate diminutives ending in -ion (e.g., Nannion, Aedonion), also rendered with neuter endings (-ium) in the Latin adaptations of Greek comedy (e.g., Astaphium, Adelphasium). This may seem like a small detail, but as Eidinow’s account of the trial of Ninos is the first significant discussion of this historical incident, I believe it is an important one. Eidinow has written an “exploratory and speculative” (266) study of envy, gossip, and social trauma in Athenian society, as well as a thought-provoking account of the reasons behind the prosecutions of the three women in question. She has laid out the pieces of the puzzle and directed her readers to consider a number of alluring possibilities. Students of classics, ancient history, and gender studies will find this volume an enjoyable journey through the messy public and private affairs of fourth-century Athens. University of Florida K. Kapparis Masterpieces of Metonymy: From Ancient Greek Times to Now. By Gregory Nagy. Washington, D.C.: Center for Hellenic Studies. 2015. Pp. xi, 284. Gregory Nagy is best known for his work on older Greek poets—particularly Homer, but also Theognis, Pindar, and others—and also for his work on Greek myth and hero cult. This book, however, concentrates on a rhetorical figure, metonymy, rather than an author or a genre, while developing ideas and interests present in Nagy’s earlier work. Metonymy, in a very rough definition, consists in substituting one term for another connected to it in some way. Metonymy is usually considered a trope, a figure which changes the meaning of a term; schemes, on the other hand, such as alliteration, leave 408 PHOENIX meaning alone. Metonymy is one of what Kenneth Burke calls the “four master tropes” (metaphor, metonymy, synecdoche, and irony);1 and according to Roman Jakobson, metonymy and metaphor are the two fundamental structures of language.2 There has been an abundance of theoretical and practical discussion of metaphor, but much less of metonymy, and Nagy’s study goes a long way towards filling that gap. The book is organized in a series of studies interrelated through thematic associations. The Introduction and Part One define the concept of metonymy. Part Two shows the...
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,002 | 0,003 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,003 | 0,009 |
| Communication savante | 0,005 | 0,007 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,002 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,002 | 0,003 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,014 | 0,005 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».