Aristotle Poetics 20.7

ed. Henry James Pye

Table of Contents

Search the Perseus Catalog for:

View: By Chapter
← Previous Next →
An article is an unmeaning sound, which marks the beginning, the end or some particular distinction of a sentence; as [1] Τὸ φημὶ or To περὶ or Τὰ ἄλλα. Or, in other words, it is a sound without meaning itself, which does not affect the signification of any one sound among many and whose nature it is to be placed either at the extremities or in the middle of a sentence. A noun is a compounded sound, having signification but not marking time and whose parts, taken by themselves, have no meaning.

Poetics. Aristotle. ed. Henry James Pye. London. 1792.

Current edition Experimental

The Poetic of Aristotle (Henry James Pye, revised 1792) (OCR draft) (English) (Henry James Pye's revised 1792 English translation, corrected against the 1788 first edition, aligned to the Kassel reference edition, and supplied with a selective apparatus of substantive 1788 readings.)

Provisional text from uncorrected OCR; expect errors.

Editions (4)
Περὶ ποιητικῆς (OCR draft) (Aristotle, Poetics. Immanuel Bekker, editor, Aristotelis Opera, volume 2. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1837.) — 20 focus
Περὶ ποιητικῆς (OCR draft) Perseus (Aristotle, De arte poetica liber. Rudolf Kassel, editor. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1965. Reference edition for passage alignment.) — 20 focus
Poetics, Greek text (Ingram Bywater, 1909) (OCR draft) Experimental (Ingram Bywater's Greek text of Aristotle's Poetics, published in 1909.) — 20 focus
Poetics, Greek text (Franz Ritter, 1839) (OCR draft) Experimental (Franz Ritter's 1839 Greek edition, corrected against OCR of the represented copy and aligned to the conventional Perseus chapter-and-subchapter sequence.) — 20 focus
Translations (13)
Poetics (W. H. Fyfe) (OCR draft) Perseus (William Hamilton Fyfe's English translation of Aristotle's Poetics, Loeb Classical Library, 1939 printing.) — 20 focus
Arabic Poetics (Badawī edition, 1953) (OCR draft) (The ancient Arabic translation of Aristotle's Poetics in ʿAbd al-Raḥmān Badawī's 1953 edition.) — 20 focus
Poetics (S. H. Butcher, 1911) (OCR draft) Experimental (S. H. Butcher's English translation from Aristotle's Theory of Poetry and Fine Art, fourth edition, 1911.) — 20 focus
Aristotle on the Art of Poetry (Ingram Bywater, 1909) (OCR draft) Experimental (Ingram Bywater's English translation of Aristotle's Poetics, published in 1909.) — 20 focus
Poetics (Thomas Twining, 1789) (OCR draft) Experimental (Thomas Twining's English translation of Aristotle's Poetics, published in 1789 and aligned to the Kassel reference passage sequence.) — 20.7 focus
An article, is a sound without signification, which marks the beginning, or the end of a sentence; or distinguishes, as when we say, THE word φημι, THE word περι, &c. 1 * * * * *.
The Poetic of Aristotle (Theodore Alois Buckley) (OCR draft) Experimental (Theodore Alois Buckley's English translation, first published in 1850 and represented from the Henry G. Bohn 1857 printing; corrected against a second OCR and aligned to the Kassel reference passage sequence.) — 20.7 focus
An article is a sound without signification, which snows the beginning, or end, or distinction of a word 7; as τὸ φημί, and ὸro περί, and others of the like kind. Or it is a sound without signification, which neither impedes nor produces one significant sound naturally adapted to be composed from many sounds, both in the extremes and in the middle. 1 2
Poetica Latine conversa (Franciscus Ritter, 1839) (OCR draft) Experimental (Franz Ritter's Latin translation, corrected against OCR of the represented copy and aligned to the conventional Perseus chapter-and-subchapter sequence.) — 20 focus
La poëtique d'Aristote (André Dacier, 1692) (OCR draft) Experimental (André Dacier's French translation of Aristotle's Poetics, published in 1692.) — 20.7 focus
L'article eſt un ſon, qui ne ſignifiant rien par luy-même, ſert ſeulement à montrer le commencement ou la fin du diſcours, ou à ſeparer une choſe d'une autre, comme je dis, ou à ce ſujet. Ou, ſi l'on veut, l'article eſt un ſon, qui ne ſignifiant rien par luy-même, ne fait ni n'empêche que chacun des autres n'ait ſa ſignification; mais qui les determine, & il ſe met au commencement, ou au milieu.
Poetica d'Aristotile (Bernardo Segni, 1549) (OCR draft) Experimental (Bernardo Segni's 1549 Florentine Italian translation, aligned to the Kassel reference passage sequence.) — 20 focus
De poetica (Antonio Riccobono, 1587) (OCR draft) Experimental (Antonio Riccobono's Latin translation, first published in 1587; text represented from Immanuel Bekker's 1831 edition.) — 20 focus
De arte poetica liber (William of Moerbeke, ca. 1277) (OCR draft) Experimental (William of Moerbeke's medieval Latin translation, represented by the 1953 Aristoteles Latinus edition.) — 20 focus
Arabic Poetics (Abū Bishr Mattā; Tkatsch edition) (OCR draft) Experimental (The Arabic translation attributed to Abū Bishr Mattā, edited by Jaroslaus Tkatsch in 1928 and aligned to the Kassel reference passage sequence.) — 20 focus
Arabic Poetics (Abū Bishr Mattā; Tkatsch edition, unaligned) (OCR draft) Experimental (Tkatsch's edition of the medieval Arabic translation in its original, unaligned segmentation.) — 20 focus

Commentary

Commentary on the Poetics (Ingram Bywater, 1909) (OCR draft) (Ingram Bywater's English commentary on Aristotle's Poetics.) focus

7. mvp-aristotle-comment-731

φωνῶν: 1.e. φωνῶν σημαντικῶν.

7. mvp-aristotle-comment-732

λόγου. The term is explained in 23. Aristotle is using it without explanation, as though it were a familiar and well-understood word. Just before this (in 1) he employed the periphrasis φωνὴ μία σημαντική in lieu of it. καθ᾽ αὑτόν is to be taken with λόγου (comp. Top. 8. 11, 161 b 19 ). The λόγος as such is tacitly distinguished from the λόγος as brought into relation with some other λόγος by the insertion of a word which is no integral part of it per se. καθ᾽ αὑτό is the opposite of πρὸς ἕτερον ἢ κατὰ συμβεβηκός ( Bon. Ind. 212 a 3 ).

7. mvp-aristotle-comment-733

διορισμός seems to mean here 'separation' or 'disjunction', a metaphorical extension of the sense it has in the De Partibus: 3. 10, 672 a 14
τοῦ διορισμοῦ χάριν ἐστὶ (scil. τὸ διάζωμα) τοῦ τε περὶ τὴν κοιλίαν τόπου καὶ τοῦ περὶ τὴν καρδίαν
.

7. mvp-aristotle-comment-734

πεφυκυῖα τίθεσθαι καὶ ἐπὶ τῶν ἄκρων καὶ ἐπὶ τοῦ μέσου does not necessarily mean any more than this, that some of the ἄρθρα have one and others another of these three possible places in the complex form of λόγος. πεφυκυῖα τίθεσθαι implies that the rule is general and not always observed in practice.

Remarques sur la poëtique d'Aristote (André Dacier, 1692) (OCR draft) (André Dacier's French commentary on Aristotle's Poetics.) focus

12. mvp-aristotle-comment-477

20.7 12. L'article est un ſon, qui ne ſignifiant rien par luy-mème, ſert ſeulement à montrer le commencement ou la fin du discours] 1

Commentary on the Poetics (Thomas Twining, 1789) (OCR draft) (Thomas Twining's notes on Aristotle's Poetics, aligned to the Kassel reference edition.) focus

171. mvp-aristotle-comment-171

NOTE 171. P. 105.

20.7 AN ARTICLE MARKS THE BEGINNING OR THE END OF A SENTENCE.The commentators all tell us, that this means the prepositive, and the subjunctive article; but none of them have clearly and fairly shewn us, how the one, because it is placed before a word, marks the beginning of a sentence or discourse, (
ΛΟΓΟΥ ἀρχην
;) or, how the other marks the end of it, because it follows the word to which it belongs. In the very sentence before us, for example,
Αρθρον δε ἐστι φωνη άσημα Ἡ λογου άρχην ἢ τελος, ἢ διορισμον, δηλοι
—in what sense does the subjunctive article,
Ἡ
, mark the end of the sentence—
τελος λογου
?
"L'article subjonctif,"
says Dacier ,
"est celui qui marque la fin du discours: c'est-à-dire, qu'il suit la chose qu'il designe, comme, qui, lequel."
—It is easy to explain things in this manner.
For my part, I see not what is to be made of this, unless we may understand Aristotle to mean only that power of the article, by which, in the Greek language, it distinguishes the subject from the predicate, in certain propositions, and determines the order of construction. See Hermes, II. 1. p. 230. —But, then, this is no other than a species of
διορισμα
, and is, indeed, given by Mr. Harris as one example of the definitive or ascertaining power of the article.
The second definition of the article, (
—φωνη άσημα —— to συντίθεσθαι
) I have omitted. It is the first definition of the conjunction repeated verbatim. It may, indeed, be true of both; but if so, it must inevitably follow, I think, either that the two things must be the same, or, that the words are not truly a definition of either. Yet this passes smoothly with all the commentators I have seen, except Madius and Piccolomini .

Commentary on the Poetics (Henry James Pye, 1792) (OCR draft) (Henry James Pye's 1792 English commentary, aligned to the Kassel reference edition.) focus

20.3. mvp-aristotle-comment-83 20.7

AN ARTICLE IS AN UNMEANING SOUND WHICH MARKS THE BEGINNING, THE END, OR SOME PARTICULAR DISTINCTION OF A SENTENCE.

HOW an article can be said to mark the end of a fentence, is I own beyond my comprehenfion. By the distinction of a sentence I imagine Aristotle means such words or phrafes as are diftinguished by an article, and by that distinction feparated from the rest of the difscourse, and in fact made substantives; as when we say, the conjunction AND,' ' the article THE.' In this power 'the Latin, for want of an article, is greatly deficient; and the critical writers in that language are sometimes obliged to have recourse to the Greek article; as for inftance Goulston, in his paraphrase of a sentence in this treatise, uses rò prius, and τὸ pofterius. By means of the article in English a whole sentence is frequently made a substantive, as sometimes also a single gerund is. I say sometimes; as what Dr. Lowth has observed in his grammar, (p. 140) on the gerund being always a substantive when the article THE is prefixed to it, and requiring to be followed by the genitive cafe, I can by no means affent to. In some instances it certainly is so, but in nine out of
POETIC OF ARISTOTLE. of ten, when the article is prefixed, it is because the whole sentence, and not the gerund only, is the substantive. For instance, in the example in Lilly's Grammar of a fentence being the nominative case to a verb.
Ingenuas didiciffe fideliter artes • Emollit mores, nec finit esse feros.' If we translate as we may [L], • The having learned the liberal arts,' furely were we to alter the tense of the infinitive from the preterite to the present, we should retain the same general sense and say, 'The learning ' the liberal arts,' not • The learning of the liberal arts.' The gerund seems never to be properly a substantive but when the noun that it governs would be its nominative case if it continued a verb. To explain myself more clearly, were I to say, suppose speaking of a court of justice, such a thing happened before the swearing the evidence, meaning previous to the clerk of the court's adminiftering the oath, SWEARING is a gerund governing EVIDENCE, and THE makes a fubstantive of the whole sentence. But were I to say, before the swearing of the evidence,' I should conceive EVIDENCE as the governing cafe of the verb, which would not then be transative but neuter, and express the act of the evidence and not of the officer of the court, and in this case it would indeed be a substantive. In such expreffions as • the crowing of a cock,'' the neighing of a • horse,' the gerunds are compleatly changed into substantives, and as such will admit a plural. [L] There is no doubt but in this as in several other of the instances, the article may be more elegantly omitted, but it is equally clear that it may also be prefixed, and in some cafes - must be prefixed, which is quite sufficient for the purpose. • Steed
• Steed answers steed in high and boastful neighings.' Or the English genitive, as a horse's neighing. But whether I say ' eating bread,' or 'the eating of bread,' ' EATING' will neither admit the plural, nor the English genitive. The flying a kite' is the diversion of a boy or the experiment of an electrician. • The flying of a kite' is the motion of the machine, or the action of the bird from which it is named. • The carving a door' is the act of the artist; ' the carving of a door' the object of that act compleated. Another proof that the word still continues a gerund without assuming any of the characters of a substantive is the necessity of its being followed by an infinitive, and its incapacity to govern another gerund. We cannot say' the defiring of feeing' as we might the ' defire of feeing, we must say ' the defiring to see.' That the fentence and not the gerund is to be confidered as the fubstantive, will be further proved from instances where the gerund is preceded by a noun in the English genitive case, or a pronoun possessive, which equally with the article mark one or other of them to be a fubftantive. • Peter's denying Christ, would any correct writer say' of • Chrift?' • My reading a passage of Ariftotle;' Would you say' of a passage of Ariftotle ?" if you do you change the sense. Reading will indeed be a substantive, but will fignify some alteration affecting the fenfe, and not the pronunciation of the words.. Dr. Lowth mentions the use of CONTINUAL and CONTINUALLY, the adjective and adverb as a criterion in this cafe. By that criterion. I am
POETIC OF ARISTOTLE. am content that my hypothefis shall be tried. If the gerund can poffibly be connected with an adjective, I give up my cause. • He is continu- ، ally teaching Paul.' Is 'the continually teaching Paul laudable ?' Here the article is necessarily prefixed in the last member of the sentence; but it is said if THE is prefixed of must follow. Then must we fay • the continually teaching of Paul?' If we do the sense is entirely changed; of ceases to be a fign of the genitive case, and becomes a prepofition, and would be rendered in Latin by ' de Paulo,' concerning, about Paul. If the adverb CONTINUALLY is made an adjective, and we say' the continual teaching of Paul,' TEACHING will undoubtedly be a substantive, but Paul will be the teacher. Instead of • the soundly beating a man,' could we say the found beating of a • man? Or to take Dr. Lowth's own example, instead of by well • observing which,' could we say, ' by the good observing of which ?' for directly gaining wisdom,' could we say, • the direct gaining of • wisdom?' for ' easily supplying our wants,'' the easy supplying of our wants?' for ' quietly enjoying,'' the quiet enjoying?' It must be observed this is marked most strongly when WELL and Good are the examples, as in other cafes the adjective and adverb are sometimes confounded by incorrect speakers. I must however allow that the gerund, confidered merely as such, may sometimes be followed by a genitive case on the authority of the Latin, whose grammar in doubtful cases is generally allowed to be decifive as to our own. For example: ‘Aliquid fuit principium generandi ← animalium.' VARRO. • Fuit exemplorum legendi potestas.' CICERO. • Vestri adhortdi causa.' TACITUS. !.. • Generandi gloria mellis.' VIRGIL. NOTE

Commentarius in Aristotelis Poeticam (Franciscus Ritter, 1839) (OCR draft) (Ritter's Latin commentary, extracted from the 1839 volume, divided by Ritter's chapters and sections, and linked to the corresponding Perseus reference subsections.) focus

7. mvp-aristotle-comment-141

Ritter, cap. 20 § 7

ἄρθρον δ' ἐστὶ φωνὴ ἄσημος-διορισμὸν δηλοῖ: quod articulus orationis sive enuntiati initium designare dicitur, hoc intelligi videtur, multa enuntiata ab articulo inchoari: quomodo idem τέλος indicet ego non expedio. exempla τὸ φημί et τὸ περί solam postremam articuli vim, ubi distinctionem denotat, respiciunt. sed ut quod deest virtuti definitionis, numero compensetur, iam altera articuli explicatio succedit, ἢ φωνὴ ἄσημος, ἢ οὔτε κωλύει οὔτε ποιεῖ φωνὴν μίαν σημαντικὴν ἐκ πλειόνων φωνῶν, πεφυκυῖα τίθεσθαι καὶ ἐπὶ τῶν ἄκρων καὶ ἐπὶ τοῦ μέσου. quae συνδέσμου definitio modo posita erat, eadem paucis omissis paucisque mutatis iam pro altera articuli definitione venditatur. num mirum hoc est? mihi secus videtur: nam quipaulo ante duas convinctionis definitiones non veras attulit, cur idem articuli duas non minus ineptas non producat? at haec nimium similis est illi convinctionis definitioni. est sane et esse potest. nam quemadmodum σύνδεσμος est (sic ille fere cogitavit) id quod convincit, ita ἄρθρον est quod iungit ( ἄρει) 1). quapropter indicare voluit quatenus vox illa non iungat, ne quis nomine ἄρθρον decipi se pateretur.