Res meaning a thing thought: The influence of the Ars donati

Vivarium

Volumn 45, Issue 2, 2007, Pages 189-202

  Grondeux, Anne ^a  

^a CNRS   (France)

Author keywords

Body; Donatus; Incorporeal; Noun; Signify; Thing; Thought

Indexed keywords

EID: 34548559333     PISSN: 00427543     EISSN: 15685349     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1163/156853407X217713     Document Type: Article

References (72)

1. I want to thank for their reading and suggestions Irène Rosier-Catach, Brian Merrilees, as well as Leonora Lorenzetti, who kindly let me use her transcription of the Glosulae from ms. Metz, BM 1224.
2. Note that the considerations about the meaning of nomen can be found in three places of the Roman artes: the first one is the definition of what a nomen is (1), which takes place at the beginning of the section dealing with noun; the second one comes a bit further, where grammarians enumerate the different types of nouns, starting with the appellatives (2); the third one, which does not occur in every grammar, introduces the difference between three words, nomen, appellatio and vocabulum (3).
3. Aelius Donatus, Ars maior II 2 (1981, 614: 2-3).
4. Ibid. II 2 (1981, 615: 1-2): Appellativorum nominum species multae sunt....Alia enim sunt corporalia, ut homo terra mare, alia incorporaria, ut pietas iustitia dignitas.'
5. About this terminology and its juridical connotations, see Buffa (1982, 7-28) and Grondeux (2003, 35-76).
6. Flavius Sosipater Charisius, Artis grammatkae libri V (1997, 193: 24 sq.).
7. Cf. Flury (1982, 35-45). For a later statement on the same question, see Augustine, Locutiones in heptateuchum (1958, 3: 32): 'Non hoc est "existens", quod graecus dixit ώv, sed si dici posset "essens".'
8. Cf. Dionysius Thrax, Technè 2 (1989, 50-51),
9. and Buffa (1982).
10. For the Technè, see Law and Sluiter (1998) and Law (2003).
11. The passage is known by a scholion on the Technè, cf. Lallot (1989, 128).
12. Cf. G. Nudielmans (1973, 45 sq.);
13. Luhtala (2000b, 110 sq.);
14. Hadot (1980, 309-319).
15. Nuchelmans (1973, 47-55).
16. Quintilian Institutio oratoria 3 (1975, 6: 28) already provides the equivalence "res", id est pragmata',
17. cf. ThLL X 2, 7 col. 1119, 56 sq.
18. The use of res for pragma by Charisius is also relevant, for this grammarian, who teaches in Constantinople, provides an explicit equivalence between these two words, as well as εǐδoç (thought, object of thought) as an equivalent of res in the same contexts, see Charisius (1997, 46: 18 and 460: 22).
19. However, since Charisius is a compilator, his use of re sometimes proves inconsistant, see Grondeux (2003).
20. Nuchelmans (1973, 48).
21. About dating the Technè, see Lallot (1989, 19-31 (s. II a.C. for chapters 1,-10, s. III p. C. for chapters 11-20);
22. about Latin grammarians borrowing from the Greek tradition, see Law (2003, 65).
23. Cf. Bréhier (1962, 7).
24. For the occurrence of the same question in the difference between three words, nomen, appellatio and vocabulum see Grondeux (2003).
25. Priscian, Partitiones ad Aen. 5, 1 (GL III, 480:33).
26. Cf. Holtz (1981, 243).
27. Cf. Buffa (1982, 24).
28. Priscian, Ibid. (GL III, 475: 13).
29. See also Servius, Commentarius in artem Donati (GL IV) 406: 29-30, as well as the passage dealing with the different types of appellative nouns (429, 15 sq.): 'Sunt nomina corporalia, quae videmus et tangimus, ut terra lapis;
30. sunt incorporalia, quae nee videmus nee tangimus, ut pietas iustitia'. The same topic is being dealt with by Servius, Primae expositiones Sergii de prioribus Donati grammatici urbis Romae (GL IV, 143: 16-19).
31. For an analysis of the sentence about the philosophers and their different opinions, cf. Grondeux (2003).
32. Cf. Holtz (1981, 99 n.12).
33. Pompeius (Maurus), Commentum artis Donati (GL V, 137: 24-29).
34. Cledonius, Ars grammatica (GL V, 34: 26).
35. Löfstedt, Ars Ambrosiana, Commentum anonymum in Donati partes maiores (1982, 6: 26-29).
36. Iulianus Toletanus, Ars grammatica, poetica, rhetorica 1, 1, 14 (1973, 12: 67): 'Quare dixit: corpus aut rem? Quia aut corporale erit ipsud nomen aut incorporale. Quid est corporale? Quod videtur et tangitur, ut homo terra, mare. Quid est incorporale? Quod nee videtur nee tangitur, sed tantummodo in animo geritur, ut pietas iustitia dignitas.'
37. Tatuinus, Ars grammatica I, 25 (1968).
38. See also a. bit further at 1, 93-95 the distinction between nouns meaning vel corpus vel corporalitatem and nouns meaning incorporalitatem.
39. Erchanbert, Erchanberti Frisingensis tractatus super Donatum (1948, 8, 2 sq.).
40. Marius Victorinus, De definitionibus (1888, 7-8).
41. Ars Ambrosiana (1982, 1: 30 sq.).
42. Anonymous ad Culmnanum (1992, 3: 43).
43. Ars preserved in the ms. Bern, Bürgerbibl. 522 (GL VIII, xlii-xliii).
44. Cf. Hamesse (1982, 101-2) for the detailed analysis of Papias' and Giovanni Balbi s definitions ('Proprie quidem res sunt quas solas estimatione et intellectu comprehendimus ut incorporeae...; quodlibet ens, un urn detranscendentibus...; quae in nostra iure consistunt);
45. Osbern of Gloucester, Derivationes (1996, R XV 16): 'Item a reor... hec res, rei';
46. Firmini Verris Dictionarius/Dictionnaire latin-français de Firmin Le Ver (1994, 430b24-26): 'Res... idest la chose-res est quicquid vel sentitur vel intelligitur vel latet; res sunt que in nostro iure consistunt';
47. Dictionarius familiaris et compendiosus. Dictionnaire latin-français de Guillaume Le Tailleur (2002, 335a25-27): 'Res... secundum Papiam .i. qiocquid vel sentitur vel intelligitur vel latet; res sunt que in nostro iure consistunt'.
48. Sedulius Scotus, In Donati artem maiorem 2 (1977, 66).
49. Remigius Autissiodorensis, Commentum Einsidlense in Donati artem minorem 16 (1912, 11).
50. Cf. Grondeux and Jeudy (2001, 139-160).
51. However one should notice that a. later master called Israel had an other opinion, relying on Augustine's, about what a res is: "Dicitur autem res secundum Israhelem quicquid sentitur vel intelligitur vel latet (= Aug. dialect. 5). Senriuntur corporalia; spiritalia intelliguntur; latet vero deus et informis materia";
52. Jeudy (1977, 754).
53. Sedulius, In Priscianum (1977).
54. Sedulius, In Priscianum (1977, 78: 62 sq.).
55. Sedulius, In Priscianum (1977, p. 79: 86 sq.).
56. Cf. Luhtala (2000a, 115-88, ad II 22 p. 157): Omne quod est aut corpus aut res est. RES dico incorporales creaturas. In usu namque latinae linguae omnia sensiblia et visibilia corpora, dicuntur. Quae autem solo intellectu noscuntur RES appellantur. Iraque ideo etiam corpora RES appellari possunt. Omnis ergo creatura generaliter REI nomine appellari potest. Omnis erga creatura RES dicitur, non autem omnis RES corpus.
57. Glasulae ad II 22(Köln, Dombibl.201, s. XII = K 14ra;
58. Metz, Bibl. Mun. 1224, s. XII = M 19vb;
59. Incunable edition apud Georgius Arrivabenus, Venezia, 1488 = I 26r).
60. See Glosulae ad II 22 (M 20a): 'Sequiturque PARS DISTRIBUIT ... Sensus est: nomen significat rem subiectam vel similem alus per aliquam communem qualitatem, velut 'homo' significat plures consimiles et unitos in eiusdem convenientia. qualitatis, scilicet rationaliratis et mortalitatis...'.
61. Priscian, Institutiones grammaticae XVII 44 (GL II, 130: 11).
62. See for instance William of Conches' Glosae in Priscianum (1981, 36 ad II 22): Iterum substantia, divida in duo, in corpus et REM. Corpus vocat omne corporeum sive verum sive fictum, REM vero vocat incorpoream substantiam, quia, RETUR, id est EXISTIMATUR, non corporeo sensu percipitur.
63. Glosulae ad II 18 (K, f.13rab; I, f. 24v-25r; M 18rb-va).
64. See also Sedulius, In Priscianum (1977, 78).
65. Glosulae (K f. 15ra, M 21rb, I f. 27v).
66. See Glosulae (K 14rb-va, M 20rb).
67. Ad Graec. XII 327-330 ms. Paris, BnF lat. 14746 f 117rb (XV s.).
68. Cf. Jolivet (1975, 531-545).
69. Bonaventure I 25, 3 p. 446b: 'Res enim dicitur a reor, reris, quod dicit actum a parte animae.'
70. See also ibid. II 37, 1, p. 876a.
71. Alexander Hales, Glossa in quatuor libros sententiarum P. Lombardi 1 (1951, 332): 'Res dicitur ut se ipso ens; res enim dicitur ut ens ratum.'
72. Quoted by Hamesse (1982, 91-104).