Відмінності між версіями «Shed by Veronique Boudon-Millot in `Un trait?perdu de Galien miraculeusement»

Поточна версія на 22:45, 2 квітня 2018

Neurologic origins of mental disorder (Rosenberg 2007), while also setting the scene Sotiroudis (eds), ` ', , 60 (2010), 63?48 (henceforth KS), with cross-references to the BJP edition for the reader's convenience (note that the two edns present different chapter division and lining). The translations of Avoiding Distress cited all through are mine; the translations of Galen's other ethical functions are appropriated versions with the translations contained in Peter Singer (ed.), Galen: Psychological Writings: Avoiding Distress, Character Traits, The Diagnosis and Therapy on the Affections and Errors Peculiar to Every single Person's Soul, The Capacities of the Soul rely on the Mixtures in the Body (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2014). Within the exact same title= ten.tea.2011.0131 volume there's a new English translation of Avoiding Distress by V.Shed by Veronique Boudon-Millot in `Un trait?perdu de Galien title= pnas.1107775108 miraculeusement e retrouv?, le Sur l'inutilit?de se chagriner: Texte grec et traduction francaise', in V. Boudon-Millot, A. Guardasole e e ??and C. Magdelaine (eds), La Science m?dicale antique: Nouveaux regards: Etudes r?unies en l'honneur de e e Jacques Jouanna (Paris: Beauchesne, 2007), 73?23 (henceforth BM). A rev. edn followed: V. Boudon-Millot, J. Jouanna along with a. Pietrobelli (eds), Galien, Tome IV: Ne pas se chagriner (Paris: Belles Lettres, 2010) with French translation and commentary (henceforth BJP). The references I give to the Greek text are mainly based on the edition of P. Kotzia and P. Soteroudis with the identical year, P. Kotzia and P. Sotiroudis (eds), ` ', , 60 (2010), 63?48 (henceforth KS), with cross-references towards the BJP edition for the reader's convenience (note that the two edns present diverse chapter division and lining). It's striking that the text of Kotzia and Sotiroudis (otherwise easily obtainable in all key libraries) has been neglected by modern scholars, despite the fact that they have been the only editors who had autopsy from the manuscript in preparing their edition. This assisted them on palaeographical grounds to reconstruct corrupted words title= en.2011-1044 which the other editors haven't been capable to identify with certainty. As an illustration, in ?, 68, 49 KS = ?1, 5, eight BJP, Kotzia and Sotiroudes read ?in the beginning from the word, and ?at the end of it, and hence supplemented 3 missing letters in the middle ��, suggesting [], whereas the French editors only study ?because the initial letter of a word, suggesting [ ]. Similarly, ?, 68, 51 KS recommend [ ], but ?1, 5, 10 BJP can't possibly supplement the word, due to the fact a starting epsilon (? is definitely the only letter they can read. Added motives that led me to prefer the KS edn is their wealthy apparatus of parallel passages in contrast to the meagre one particular of BJP, and their detailed commentary, which supplies in depth remarks on philological, philosophical and healthcare matters arising in the text. Additional emendations on corrupted passages happen to be suggested by Ivan Garofalo, `Congetture inedite', Galenos, 2 (2008), 137?; Ioannis Polemis, ` , , 43 (2011), 1?; Antonio Stramaglia, `Libri perduti per sempre: Galeno, "De indolentia" 13; 16; 17?9', Rivista di Filologia e di Istruzione Classica, 139 (2011), 118?7; Anargyros Anastassiou, `Galen, de indolentia, ?1, S. 21, 17?9 Boudon-Millot, Jouanna = ?7, S. 79, 321?22 Kotzia, Sotiroudis = ?1, S.