Jump to content

Summa Grammatica

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

TheSumma Grammatica[n 1](Latinfor "Overview of Grammar";c. AD 1240[2]orc. 1250)[3]was one of the earlier works onLatin grammarandAristotelian logicby the medievalEnglishphilosopherRoger Bacon.[4]It is primarily noteworthy for its exposition of a kind ofuniversal grammar.[2]

History

[edit]

The work is apparently a series of lectures given byBaconfor themandatory classesonPriscian's workOn Construction(Books XVII & XVIII of hisInstitutes of Grammar) at theUniversity of Paris,[5]where he taught in the 1230s and '40s. Much more than Bacon's later linguistic works, theSumma Grammaticalies in the mainstream of 13th-century analysis.[3]The first part borrows directly fromRobert Kilwardby's commentary onPriscian.[6][7]More generally, the work reflects thespeculative grammartaught atOxfordin such 13th-century works as theLogica cum Sit Nostra.[8]It is probable that the final draft of the work which Bacon mentions in hisCommunia Naturalium[9]was never completed.[10]HisGreekandHebrew GrammarsandCompendium of Philosophymay have been considered as part of it.[10]

It survived in two manuscripts: P and W. P is a copy inbook handevidently intended for a personal library.[11]W is a students' copy written in the informal hand of the late 13th or early 14th century.[5][12]

Contents

[edit]

The work describesfigurative language,rhetorical devices,and irregularLatin grammar[13]using "sophisms" or illustrative examples.[14]It aims to complement Bacon's students' required readings ofPriscian's workOn Constructionby presenting its important points in a more thorough and logical order.[14]It assumes a mastery of standard grammatical rules which the students would have already learnt asglomerelli.[15]It most frequently citesPriscian,but more often adopts the solutions ofPeter Helias.[15]

The first section lays out rules regarding grammatical agreement and the rhetorical devicesantithesis,[16][17]synthesis,[18][19]procatalepsis,[20][21][8]From theAristoteliannotion that "art imitates natureto the extent that it can "[22][23]and under the influence ofAverroës's commentaries,[8]Bacon argues that nouns and pronouns can be distinguished from verbs and adverbs owing to the distinction between permanent and successive things.[8]Further, verbs constitute a kind of movement from the subject[n 2]to the object[24][n 3]which imposes obligations on the grammar.[8]For instance, owing to their origin from verbs, Bacon considers that participles and infinitives are too unstable to function properly as the object of a sentence, as "nothing which is in motion can come to rest in something in motion, no motion being able to complete itself in something in motion".[8]

The second section deals with non-figurative constructions including impersonals,[25][26]gerundives,[27][28]interjections,[29][30]andablative absolutes.[31][32][8]

The third section[33]covers illustrative examples by topic in greater or less detail[8]and more or less at random.[34]The primary ones areMoris erat Persis ducibus tunc temporis omnem ducere in arma domum,[35]Vestes quas geritis sordida lana fuit,[36]Amatus sum vel fui,[37]Vado Romam que est pulcra civitas,[38]Video centum homines uno minus,[39]Lupus est in fabula,[40]In nostro magistro habet bonum hominem,[41]Margarita est pulcherrimus lapidum,[42]Quid nisi secrete leserunt Philide silve,[43]andNominativo hic magister.[44]Most of these examples appear in other collections.[34]

The fourth section analyses short sentences, along with adverbial phrases and liturgical formulas[8]such asite missa est[45]whose use ofellipsispresented certain problems.[34]It's divided into three sections on "On Some Cases in the Nominal Absolute",[46][47]"On MediateApposition",[48][49]and "On Some Difficulties in Speech".[50][51]

Intentionalism

[edit]

Bacon emphasizes that grammatical rules cannot be applied mechanistically but must be understood as a structure through which to attempt to understand the author's intent (intentio proferentis).[8]The desire to communicate some particular idea may require breaking some of the standard rules.[52]Such exceptions must, however, be linguistically justified.[8]In this he followsKilwardby.[8]Although Bacon considered an understanding of logic to be important for clarity in philosophical and theological texts, he found his era'sModistanalyses needed to be tempered by a contextual understanding of the linguistic ambiguity inevitable in theimposition of signsand from the shifts of meaning and emphasis over time.[8]

Universal grammar

[edit]

Bacon argues for auniversal grammarunderlying allhumanlanguages.[2]As more tersely stated in his laterGreek Grammar:[2]

Grammar is one and the same in all languages, substantially, though it may vary, accidentally, in each of them.[55][n 4]

Hovdhaugenleaves open the possibility, however, that, unlike theModistswho followed Bacon, his own statements on the subject did not refer to a universal grammar but to a universal science to be employed in studying linguistics across languages.[56]This derives from an ambiguity in theLatingrammatica,which referred variously to thestructure of language,to its description, and tothe science underlying such descriptions.[56]

See also

[edit]
  • Modistae,the philosophical school which developed partially under the influence of this work[2]
  • Book III of theOpus Majus

Notes

[edit]
  1. ^In modern references, this standard spelling is typically used, but it is actually written asSumma Gramaticain the surviving texts.[1]
  2. ^Referenced in the work by the terms of art "first item" (principium) or "end from which" (terminus a quo).[8]
  3. ^Referenced in the work by the terms of art "end" (terminus) or "end to which" (terminus ad quem).[8]
  4. ^InLatin,Grammatica una et eadem est secundum substantiam in omnibus linguis, licet accidentaliter varietor.

References

[edit]

Citations

[edit]
  1. ^Nolan & al. (1902),p. v.
  2. ^abcdeMurphy (1974),p.153.
  3. ^abHovdhaugen (1990),p.121.
  4. ^SEP(2013),§2.
  5. ^abSteele (1940),p.x.
  6. ^Kilwardby,Inst. Gram.,Ch. xvii.
  7. ^Rosier-Catach (1994).
  8. ^abcdefghijklmnoSEP(2013),§3.1.
  9. ^Bacon,Com. Nat.,Bk. I, p. 1.
  10. ^abSteele (1940),p.xii.
  11. ^CambridgePeterhouse 191.
  12. ^Worcester Cathedral,MS Q13.
  13. ^Steele (1940),pp.x–xi.
  14. ^abRosier-Catach (1997),p. 68
  15. ^abSteele (1940),p.xi.
  16. ^SG,"De Antithesi".
  17. ^Nolan & al. (1902),pp. 27 ff.
  18. ^SG,"De Sinthesi vel Apposicione".
  19. ^Nolan & al. (1902),pp. 43 ff.
  20. ^SG,"De Prolemptica Construccione".
  21. ^Nolan & al. (1902),pp. 71 ff.
  22. ^Aristotle,Phys.,Bk. II, 219, 4a21.
  23. ^SG,§35.4.
  24. ^SG,§34.
  25. ^SG,"De Construccionibus Impersonibus".
  26. ^Nolan & al. (1902),pp. 74 ff.
  27. ^SG,"De Gerundio".
  28. ^Nolan & al. (1902),pp. 86 ff.
  29. ^SG,"De Interjeccione".
  30. ^Nolan & al. (1902),pp. 95 ff.
  31. ^SG,"De Ablativo Absoluto".
  32. ^Nolan & al. (1902),pp. 121 ff.
  33. ^SG,§119 ff.
  34. ^abcRosier-Catach (1997),p.69.
  35. ^Nolan & al. (1902),pp. 129 ff.
  36. ^Nolan & al. (1902),pp. 135 ff.
  37. ^Nolan & al. (1902),pp. 145 ff.
  38. ^Nolan & al. (1902),pp. 150 ff.
  39. ^Nolan & al. (1902),pp. 159 ff.
  40. ^Nolan & al. (1902),p. 161.
  41. ^Nolan & al. (1902),p. 162.
  42. ^Nolan & al. (1902),p. 163.
  43. ^Nolan & al. (1902),p. 164.
  44. ^Nolan & al. (1902),p. 165.
  45. ^Nolan & al. (1902),p. 183.
  46. ^SG,"De Quibusdam Casibus Absolute Positis".
  47. ^Nolan & al. (1902),pp. 166 ff.
  48. ^SG,"De Apposicione Mediata".
  49. ^Nolan & al. (1902),pp. 167 ff.
  50. ^SG,"De Aliquibus Locucionibus Difficilibus".
  51. ^Nolan & al. (1902),pp. 180 ff.
  52. ^Rosier-Catach (1997),p. 73.
  53. ^Nolan & al. (1902),p. 27.
  54. ^Murphy (1974),p.154.
  55. ^Nolan,[53]cited inMurphy.[54]
  56. ^abHovdhaugen (1990),pp.127–128.

Bibliography

[edit]
  • Bacon, Roger(1902), Nolan, Edmond; et al. (eds.),Grammatica Graeca[Greek Grammar],Cambridge:Cambridge University Press.
  • Bacon, Roger (1940),Steele, Robert(ed.),Summa Gramatica necnon Sumule Dialectices,Opera Hactenus Inedita Rogeri Baconi,No. XV, Oxford: John Jonson for the Clarendon Press.(in Latin)