MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2159676604 · doi:10.1353/crc.2014.0043

‘I Give You Back Plutarch in Latin’: Guarino Veronese’s Version of Plutarch’s Dion (1414) and Early Humanist Translation

2014· article· en· W2159676604 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Marianne Pade

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian review of comparative literature · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicJoseph Conrad and Literature
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanismPhilosophyLiteratureArtClassicsTheology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

‘I Give You Back Plutarch in Latin’:Guarino Veronese’s Version of Plutarch’s Dion (1414) and Early Humanist Translation Marianne Pade Curavi ut versus illos Homeri tibi traducerem in linguam latinam. Eos tibi transmitto, in quibus nonnulla ex verbo ferme converti, quaedam summatim exposui, quod a Virgilio nostro factitatum animadverti, nam cum plura particulatim intelligenda sint, ut in pane faciundo, satis habuit dicere ‘Cerealiaque arma’ [Aeneid 1.177], ne pistoria enumerans instrumenta fastidio afficeret auditorem vel ad infima et vulgaria descendens, carmini dignitatem auferret. Homerus contra in omnibus exponendis rebus poeta diligentissimus et usque ad minutissima accuratissimus cum lecti ab Ulixe facti mentionem faceret, cuiusdam oleagini trunci delationem descripsit, deinde ad rubricam directum, tum perforatum pedibus impositis expressit [Odyssey 23.190-204]; quae singula paucis dixisse contentus particularia tacui, quocirca eos versus tibi latine [o]missos, graece scribere neglexi. (Guarino, Epistolario Ep. 408) ‘I did translate those verses of Homer into Latin for you and I have sent them to you. Some of them I translated almost literally, of others I just made a summary, as I have noticed that our Virgil did too: when a larger number of things are mentioned one by one, as in bread-making, he found it sufficient to say “the tools of Ceres” in order not to bore the listener with a list of bakers’ instruments or, by stooping to low and vulgar subjects, destroy the poem’s dignity. Homer, on the other hand, was extremely attentive to detail as a poet when it came to descriptions, and he is accurate even in the smallest detail when he mentions the bed made by Ulysses. He relates how the olive trunk was taken down, then he tells how it was made up with red and perforated when the feet were put on. All these details I have just rendered in a few words, leaving out the particulars; therefore I did not transcribe the Greek equivalent for the verses I omitted in Latin.’ The passage above is from a letter Guarino da Verona (1374-1460),1 one of the most famous humanist teachers of fifteenth-century Italy, sent to his friend Girolamo Gualdo in 1427. Apparently Guarino had translated some of Odyssey 23 for Gualdo—where Penelope tests Ulysses by pretending she had moved their bed—but as [End Page 354] the translation has not survived, at least as far as I know, we cannot compare it to Guarino’s description. However, it seems clear that Guarino justifies the way he had rendered Homer by referring to Virgil, who had of course emulated Homer, and in so doing had transported not only the content of the Iliad and the Odyssey into a Roman universe, but also the style and poetics. Guarino, the translator, felt that he could do the same; he used the sense of poetic decorum learned from their Virgil, Virgilius noster, and thus allowed himself considerable freedom in the rendering of the Greek text. The tendency to transform not only words and phrases but also style and literary form into the idioms of the ‘host’ culture is a hallmark of humanist translation, both in theory and in practice. Guarino’s revered teacher, the Byzantine Manuel Chrysoloras (c. 1355-1415),2 taught his pupils to avoid a literal word-for-word rendering of the original (conversio ad verbum) and instead to aim at a translation that rendered both style and content (conversio ad sententiam):3 Sed ut de interpretis natura aliquid dicam, ferebat Manuel…conuersionem in latinum ad uerbum minime ualere. Nam non modo absurdum esse asseuerabat, uerum etiam interdum grecam sententiam omnino peruertere…Sed ad sententiam transferre opus esse aiebat hoc pacto ut ii qui huiusmodi rebus operam darent, legem sibi ipsis indicerent, ut nullo modo proprietas greca immutarentur; nam si quispiam, quo luculentius apertiusque suis hominibus loquatur, aliquid grece proprietatis immutarit, eum non interpretis sed exponentis officio uti. (quoted from Bertalot) ‘But regarding the nature of translation, then Manuel…said that literal, word-for-word translation into Latin was the least useful method, because the result was harsh and disagreeable, and often failed to render even the meaning of the Greek text…Instead one should render meaning [sententiam], and those who work...

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.059
Threshold uncertainty score0.116

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0030.009
Scholarly communication0.0040.002
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0020.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0090.003

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.029
GPT teacher head0.251
Teacher spread0.222 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian review of comparative literatureSame topicJoseph Conrad and LiteratureFrench-language works237,207