The article cites passages from Τέχνη γραμματική which characterise the grammatical category of the noun number (ἀριθμοὶ ὀνομάτων) and define two classes of nouns, i.e. collective nouns (ὀνόματα περιληπτικά) and distributive (pro)nouns (ὀνόματα ἐπιμεριζόμενα), which are closely related to the catego...
Gorde:
| Egile nagusia: | |
|---|---|
| Formatua: | Artikulua |
| Sarrera elektronikoa: | https://doaj.org/article/d17b90ceefff4f868ce352f9926c0e34 |
| Etiketak: |
Etiketa erantsi
Etiketarik gabe, Izan zaitez lehena erregistro honi etiketa jartzen!
|
| Gaia: | The article cites passages from Τέχνη γραμματική which characterise the grammatical category of the noun number (ἀριθμοὶ ὀνομάτων) and define two classes of nouns, i.e. collective nouns (ὀνόματα περιληπτικά) and distributive (pro)nouns (ὀνόματα ἐπιμεριζόμενα), which are closely related to the category of the number. Subsequently, the passages are confronted with the comments of Byzantine scholiasts on them, quoted from A. Hilgard’s scholia edition. Familiarisation with and interpretation of the analysed scholia made it possible to demonstrate the way in which the model description of the grammatical noun number as well as the characteristics of collective nouns and distributive pronouns, contained in the textbook, were received in the circle of Byzantine grammarians. In particular, focus was put on the scholiasts’ choice in regard to which of the passages required further explanation or complement, and what explanations or complements thereof were formulated in the scholia, as well as which statements were met with objections or criticism from Byzantine commentators, what where the reasons behind those, and what were the suggested corrections. The analyses conducted, though limited to selected issues, allow for at least a partial understanding of the specificity of the grammatical education in the Byzantine Empire and the nature of the Byzantine discourse on the content of Τέχνη. |
|---|