T. MACCI PLAVTI AVLVLARIA. PERSONAE. LAR FAMILIARIS PROLOGVS EVCLIO SENEX STAPHYLA ANVS EVNOMIA MATRONA MEGADORVS SENEX. The following translation originally appeared on a website hosted by the University of Richmond. As that site is no longer online, I have resurrected the text here. Amphitruo - Asinaria - Aulularia - Bacch - Tito Maccio Plauto. January 3, | Author: Francesca Brunello DOWNLOAD PDF - MB. Share Embed Donate.

Language:English, Spanish, German
Country:Korea South
Published (Last):17.04.2016
Distribution:Free* [*Registration Required]
Uploaded by: LORENZA

62362 downloads 115565 Views 14.42MB PDF Size Report

Aulularia Plauto Pdf

Request PDF on ResearchGate | On Dec 30, , David Antonio Roa Nova and others published Verbos deponentes en la Aulularia de Plauto. AULULARIA DI PLAUTO PDF DOWNLOAD - osakeya.info miles gloriosus aulularia qui hinc ad forum abiit, gloriosus, impudens, stercoreus, plenus. Download Aulularia-Miles gloriosus-Mostellaria Testo latino a fronte PDF: Download Aulularia-Miles PLAUTO, MOSTELLARIA O COMEDIA DEL FANTASMA.

No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted in any form or by any means without the permission of the publisher. Box E-mail: medstud ceu. The time and place of production are unknown, but the majority of recent scholars agree on late fourth- or early fifth-century Gaul. Considerable scholarly effort has been invested in identifying the author, but no satisfactory solution has so far been offered. The play poses a number of complex questions, many of which still remain unanswered. For all the corrections, suggestions, and words of support, I express my utmost gratitude to my thesis supervisor Niels Gaul and my external readers R. Mathisen and C. Pieper, as well as to M. Shanzer, T. Moore, M.

Chapter 5 examines the language of abuse, ranging from profanity to obscenity then racism. There are several noteworthy and unique presentations in the book. The inclusion of data from many informants, who live in widely different cultures, Book reviews has certainly contributed to the richness of the material covered.

Allan and Burridge have also chosen to include references from Middle Dutch medical texts to explore the past use of euphemism in discussions about the human body and its functions.

Not only does this feature expand the discussion into another non-English context but it documents how euphemisms for taboos were employed hundreds of years ago.

Any reader who has savored the content of these old medical texts will appreciate their presence here. The focus on gender-related language is quite current and pertinent, as is a later analysis of the language used to describe diseases. The authors' comparison of leprosy, syphilis and AIDS and how society reacted to and defined these diseases is particularly illuminating.

There are some minor additions that would enhance the discussion in the central section. The topic of disgust is very intriguing and a survey assessing people's reactions and interpretations of items of disgust e.

However, the work of Rozin e. Rozin and Fallon has been overlooked and should be included if a later version of the book is published. Furthermore, the authors provide linguistic evidence by comparing different sentences to demonstrate that some words and references are more offensive than others. They claim by comparing sentences that shit is more dysphemistic than either prick or twat.

This linguistic analysis may be sufficient for some readers but to strengthen the claim that words differ in their degree of offensiveness, they could have cited the wealth of data available in the social and behavioral sciences to provide empirical evidence of how people are offended by these terms of abuse see Jay for example. The social science data simply may have eluded the authors and their informants because they are working generally from the linguistic field rather than within social sciences.

The final chapters of the book turn away from sexology and move toward medical or political issues chapters 6 through 8 and toward art and literary themes chapter 9. The language and references associated with the phenome- non of death and dying, common to all cultures, is the subject of chapter 6.

Language associated with sickness, disease and illness is covered in the seventh chapter. In chapter 8 jargons or registers are discussed in relation to in-group and out-group distinctions. Chapter 9 looks at euphemisms and dysphemisms related to the world of art and bawdy works. Chapter l0 covers concluding thoughts and ties up the loose ends from earlier chapters on euphemism and dysphemism. Psychologists and others interested in theories and philosophies of psycho- pathology or abnormal behavior will recognize that the authors have fallen prey to the mental illness metaphor when they discuss abnormal thought and behavior in chapter 7.

The concept of psychopathology, as being medical in origin, such that 'doctors' treat 'patients' in 'hospitals', is just that, a metaphor for describing the nature and scope of psychological disorders.

These Book reviews disorders also may be explained with other models of behavior and thought such as the psychodynamic, behavioral, phenomenological or existential models. While the notion that disturbed people had diseases was important in releasing 'inmates' from jails and placing them in better surroundings years ago, the disease metaphor is only one of several available in modern psycholo- gical literature.

This is one of the few flaws in the text. In the introduction to the work, the authors state that the purpose of the book is to expose and explain the kinds of euphemistic and dysphemistic expressions that people use. They emphasize that their book is not intended to be merely a dictionary of euphemisms and dysphemisms, noting that there are several volumes by others available to the reader.

One may find their final product to be similar to Montagu's The anatomy of swearing or Sagarin's The anatomy of dirty words , although the authors did not mention the latter. Allan and Burridge certainly have produced an analysis more lively and realistic than a static and dated dictionary-type approach. Because context, motivation and intention are so important to understanding how and why people use euphemism and dysphemism, these social and situational variables are essential to explain them.

It is the contextual and social analysis that makes the work so interesting and sets this book apart from earlier attempts. In the final analysis, the positive features far outweigh the negative ones.

The book stands as a valuable reference on the topic and should be added to the professional library of those interested in taboos on and euphemisms involved with communication, language and lexicon. It will prove most satisfying to readers with a background in linguistics, like the authors'.

The approach will fall a bit short for those interested in social science research and empirical data gathering, not a fault of the book but a limitation of the linguistic method of analysis. References Jay, Timothy, Doing research with dirty words. Montagu, Ashley, The anatomy of swearing. New York: Macmillan. Rozin, Paul and April E. Fallon, A perspective on disgust.

Menaechmi | Open Library

Psychological Review Sagarin, Edward, Aurum est quod sequor: hoc est quod ultra maria et terras olet emphasis mine. A new target, real and palpable, is now a substitute for the conventional, or better, the symbolic one.

The parasite himself takes care to reveal his intentions, seemingly contrary to the expectations of the audience. Whether the audience was really meant to be surprised or this was just a generic formula perhaps already conventional by that time, his declaration is striking. Mandrogerus is not a gluttonous and harmless sponger, a ridiculous cartoon clown drooling over a piece of bread on the floor: he is a downright thief, motivated by age-old human desire.

Nominally still hungry for food, this parasite is in fact hungry for gold. From a wider perspective, however, I suggest that such an evolution was only natural.

Namely, the comic topos of parasitic hunger must have been utterly worn out by the time the Querolus was composed. However, during the action of the play, he is only referred to by names implying criminal activities: thief, impostor, and sacrileger.

Apart from being called furcifer The most telling, however, is the frequency of the terms denoting his deeds, namely, fraus 3.

Mathisen and D. Shanzer Aldershot: Ashgate, , — In the Querolus, this essentially animal instinct is — at last — raised to the level of understandable human aspiration for material prosperity. Yet even if one imagines that financial profit may have been an implied objective of a parasitic profession all along, this is the first time it is said out loud in a comic context. Gold, that Fragrant Object of Desire It is most amusing to inspect in detail how the author presented this evolution.

As I intend to exemplify, he was fully aware of the comic conventions he transparently adapted, generating an effective parody of traditional parasitic requirements.

Concretely, allusions to food and gluttony in association with gold occur constantly in the Querolus. Immediately follows the reference to cooks and food.

Amphitruo - Asinaria - Aulularia - Bacch - Tito Maccio Plauto

Thus, the line huius ollae conditum solus sciuit Euclio My breath is caught in my throat. I never knew before this that gold could have such a rank smell. It ought to have a stench like this for moneylenders. So, what do the ashes smell like? Expense and grief, the sort of smell a wretched funeral demands. These ashes would seem to have had honorable treatment if they still have such a worthy smell. Furthermore, the gold reeks precisely and only because they lament over its absence and the malodor is the materialization of their regret.

Formally speaking, in their misperception they would be able to smell nothing but the remains of a cremated cadaver, and their conversation thus proceeds in that direction. In a sense most interesting in understanding the puns in the Querolus, namely, that of a dish suitable for keeping ashes, it is found, e. Anima in faucibus. Audieram egomet olere aurum, istud etiam redolet Claustrum illud plumbeum densa per foramina diris fragrat odoribus.

Nunquam ante haec comperi aurum sic ranciscere. Vsurario cuilibet faetere hoc potest. Quisnam cinerum est odor? Ille pretiosus atque tristis, cultus quem poscit miser. Honorifice hoc bustum tractatum apparet, cuius adhuc sic redolet dignitas slightly modifed Duckworth translation; emphases mine.

Throughout the Querolus it is gold which smells instead of food. Now, the ashes smell instead of gold. What spot will give us shelter? What pot will give us food?

Quae nos aula recipiet? Quae nos olla tuebitur? The adage, humorously adapted in the Querolus, dates back to Petronius, It is inserted in the conversation in the fourth scene between the three impostors.

What else are we looking for except to satisfy our bellies and gullets? There the author admits once more that he was well aware of what was supposed to be expected from parasites, but through his characters he mocks the conventional frame he had to force them into. Dicebat nescio quis somnianti nocte hac mihi thesaurum istum quem requirimus mihi seruari manifesta fide nec cuiquam alteri concessum esse aurum illud inuenire nisi mihi.

Sed insuper adiecit ex istis opibus hoc tantummodo mihi profuturum quod consumpsisset gula. Optime edepol somniasti. Quid autem aliud quaerimus nisi tantum quod sufficiat uentri et gulae? It is symptomatic that, although the three parasites are on a joint project, the gold is explicitly reserved only for the leader, Mandrogerus, and it will fill only his stomach nec cuiquam alteri… nisi mihi; mihi profuturum…. Perhaps the parasite is imagined as too selfish to share anything, although, for that matter, no group of three characters appears in any of the preserved plays.

Et nosmet scimus, Querole, quoniam tris edaces domus una non capit. Verum quaesumus, uiatici nobis aliquid ut aspergas, quoniam spem omnem amisimus. An earlier line Here the term rex was most likely chosen with respect to its meaning in the comic context OLD, s.

Duckworth, The Complainer, , translates it in that meaning; Jacquemard-LeSaos, Querolus, 23, offers multiple interpretations of rex, and remains indecisive as usual. Here we see a potentially severe violation of not only the elementary parasite conventions but also of plain logic: a parasite does not exist without a host. But even so, he betrays the comic type lacking the two basic ingredients, humble subservience and dependence; gluttony, as shown, has already been taken care of. Strangely, 34 Quer.

Shortly after, Mandrogerus uses the hunting comparison again Giese, De parasiti persona, 21, called him adiutor fidelissimus domini. See also a charming essay of T. Franko, T. Moore, D. Although the author did modify and overtly parody them, in a deft manner he ultimately preserved them.

This was achieved through the experiment I mentioned above. Mandrogerus is introduced in the comedy as the former parasite of Euclio, and ends it as the parasite of Querolus. In between, however, he is striving to become what the author wanted, yet what a parasite by definition cannot possibly be: independent. Interestingly enough, if only Mandrogerus had played it safe and accepted his designated share of the treasure instead of risking for the whole — what a petty parasite, a born loser, would have been expected to do — he would have eventually become rich and ceased to be a parasite.

Unfortunately for him, but fortunately for the conventions, his illegitimate ambitions are frustrated, and a happy ending — the conventional, and indeed the only possible ending — was just a matter of time. The author, however, found a conveniently paradoxical solution: Mandrogerus was sent back where he belongs not only in spite of his efforts to escape being a parasite; he was restored to his initial and only appropriate status precisely because 37 See above, n.

The borderline between a mercenary trickster and an independent one was far thinner in real life than in a literary genre still limited by inherited conventions. This experimental parasite was dispatched to point to that line and to cross it for a moment on his way to the real world — a world in which criminals can succeed — but was withdrawn just in time to remain within the comic frame.

In signaling one direction of the development of this comic role, the anonymous author still makes no attempt to deny that the Querolus is, before and after all, just a play, staged in a cosmos of fantasy.

The Applied Parasites So much for comedy. For the most part Mandrogerus does not fit the pattern of the comic type, but could have been inspired by more concrete individuals. The image of false friends perfidiously prowling around a rich acquaintance whose end was near was known already to Cicero, Ovid, Horace, Persius, Seneca, Petronius, Pliny, Martial, Juvenal, and Apuleius; literary references to this phenomenon are incalculable.

Ars am. Martial, however, was far from allergic to captatio himself: see C. The fact that a practice as concrete as captatio was a frequent topic of colorful satirical descriptions shows that it must have, in a presumably less colorful form, really existed; it is only human to hope for a great deal of money with as few investments as possible.


Naturally, one should be cautious in taking satire and epigrams for granted in establishing statistics; Edward Champlin is justly skeptical about interpreting the literary treatments of captatio as a source for social or legal history. Originally a satirical stock figure, it also proved to possess developmental and associative potential. There were numerous points of contact between the captator and the parasite, which satirists did not fail to underline.

But for evaluating the literary portrayal of both, this difference, I suggest, goes beyond economic consequences.

Unlike parasitism, the captatio had certain detectable social connotations,52 and where the parasite was but a symbol and a caricatured mask, for at least some captatores there is evidence that they existed. One, perhaps the natural one, is to conclude that there was a lot of it about. For an elaborate discussion of the literary image of captatores in connection with parasites, see Damon, The Mask of the Parasite, ff.

Aquilius Regulus Plin. Champlin, Final Judgements, 98, suspects that many more instances of captatio would have been recorded in non-satirical sources if the pen had been in less friendly hands — unlike, e.

Pomponius Atticus Att. Or, if one is naively sympathetic, he simply happened to be — how convenient — in the right place at the right time. The written agreement between Mandrogerus and Euclio, announced in the Prologue and later seriously consulted as evidence for determining the legal heirs,55 proves that the Querolus was not all about just any gold — but about inherited gold.

Namely, the strategies of legacy-hunters often ridiculed in satire were, as listed above, nothing but parasitical. In the Querolus, this notoriously lucrative depravity was apparently downgraded to the level of ordinary human behavior, as common as any other basis of a plot; in Classical comedy it was love. The literary topos of legacy-hunting was not short-lived.

A source approximately matching the composition of the Querolus both geographically and chronologically adds another clue.

TOP Related

Copyright © 2019 osakeya.info. All rights reserved.
DMCA |Contact Us