First published in 1938. The aim of this book is to expound Kant’s _Critique of Judgement _by interpreting all the details in the light of what Kant himself declares to be his fundamental problem. _A Commentary on Kant’s Critique of Judgement _provides an excellent introduction to Kant’s third critique, and will be of interest to students of philosophy.

"First published by Oxford University Press, 1916."--Title page verso.

First published in 2002. Routledge is an imprint of Taylor & Francis, an informa company.

Since P. Thielscher, in Philologus, 1907, pp. 117, 128, supplies us with information about the Manilian MS. Palatinus 1711 , the importance of which he himself does not seem to comprehend, I should like to point out what an interesting MS. this is. ‘It is to be suspected,’ says Thielscher, ‘that it offers interpolated readings.’ It is not a matter of ‘suspicion’ at all. If Thielscher did not know it for himself, he could have learnt from Scaliger , from Bentley, (...) from Jacob, that the readings of P long ago received sufficient publicity to enable scholars to assign it to the ‘ interpolated’ class of MSS. The Variae Lectiones of Junius is mostly occupied with the readings of P, and tells us all about P that we need know, save what Thielscher has himself added. From Thielscher we for the first time learn that P belonged to ‘Johannes Archiepiscopus Strigoniensis,’ and that it contains this subscription: ‘legi et emendaui cum magistro Galeotto 1469.’ Now just as Thielscher seems to know nothing of Junius, so he seems to have no idea who Johannes Strigoniensis is, though the reference to Galeotto and the year 1469 should at once have told him. If he had troubled to look at Schmitt's Archiepiscopi he would have found that, while Schmitth enumerates no less than six archbishops of Gran who bore the name John, yet the only one of them who fits the date 1469 is John IV. And John IV. is a famous person, being none other than that leader of the Hungarian Renaissance whom we commonly call Vitezius. (shrink)

In the Classical Quarterly, vol. ii. No. 2, reviewing Breiter's recent text of the Astronomica, together with Housman's edition of Book i, I made a number of suggestions of my own on some of the principal difficulties in the text and interpretation of Manilius. I did not, however, bring my notes down beyond Book i. In the present paper I propose to traverse some of the more thorny places of ii. and iii. I shall try to make what I have (...) to say to some extent a continued review of Breiter. (shrink)

Hardly:τoσσάδε means ‘yet again,’ or ‘again and again.’ This idiomatic use of τοσοxs22EFτος may be illustrated from Plato, Apol. 19 c, µή πως έγώ ύπò Mελήτον τοσαύτας δίκας φύγοιµι, ‘lest I should be prosecuted by Meletus on yet another charge.’ Similar, in Latin, is the use of totiens: as Hor. Epp. i. 1. 6, ‘ne populum extrema totiens exoret harena.’.

77, 3 uastat in quae includit.E has incidit for includit–another example, eagerly welcomed by Gercke, of free interpolation in this MS. Perhaps incutitur.

77, 3 uastat in quae includit.E has incidit for includit–another example, eagerly welcomed by Gercke, of free interpolation in this MS. Perhaps incutitur.

The spaced words are commonly rendered either ‘desiring to ward off from his head,’ or ‘expecting to strike his head.’ Of these two renderings the first gives to κεφαλxs22EFς βαλεxs1FD6ν a sense which is seemingly without example and which the two words can hardly bear, if they can also bear the meaning given to them by the second rendering. The meaning which this second rendering gives to them is their natural meaning : on the other hand μενοινxs22EFν does not mean, (...) and cannot mean, ‘expecting.’ It means ‘strongly desiring.’ ‘Expecting it to strike his head’ would be μένωνοxs1F31 κεφαλxs22EFς βαλεxs1FD6ν, and this, I suggest, is what Pindar wrote. (shrink)

A good edition of the Catalepton has long been wanted: and Birt's recently Published ‘Erklärung,’ despite some obvious defects, may fairly be regarded as good book. It is at any rate fresh, interesting, and stimulating. The text is the whole, though not always, sensible. The commentary is full without being too full. But, more valuable still, both commentary and introduction constantly bring home to one the probability that nearly all the poems in this collection are genuinely Vergilian— ‘Jugendverse und Heimatpoesie (...) Vergils.’ No editor before Birt has brought before us so clearly the environment out of which these poems came. (shrink)

After Mr. Stuart and Mr. Hardie I ought to be shy of speaking upon the Tragedies of Seneca. But Mr. Stuart and Mr. Hardie have stirred the dust that lay upon notes which I have had by me for some four years: and their papers encourage the hope that there is among English scholars some revival of interest in Seneca. I am afraid that I myself read Seneca for pleasure, with admiration for the justness of his moral sentiments and with (...) affection for his style. Yet I can hardly be blind to the opportunities which his text offers to those who practice the art of critical divination. (shrink)

Bücheler assigns this epitaph to the Caesarian epoch: and it is clearly not of later date. The fifth line is corrupt. Bücheler suggests tentatively the insertion of the word dilecto after Cadmo. That will indeed give us a verse of six feet. But we shall not be much the happier. We shall still have to believe that a member of the gens Heluia married, circa 100&50 B.C, a husband of the name of Cadmus Scrateius. He must have been the public (...) executioner: for I know of no other Cadmus in Rome; and he bore no very good reputation, and very little deserved the epithet dilectus, for the commentators upon Horace 5. i. 6. 39 speak of him as ‘ notae crudelitatis.’ He must be supposed to have taken the name Scrateius to make himself more terrible. But where in all the Graeco-Roman world he found it, it is impossible to guess. (shrink)

People are beginning to think of Manilius as the spoilt child of Latin Scholarship. In England alone there have appeared editions of, or works upon, Manilius, in the seventeenth century by Sherburne and Creech, in the eighteenth by Bentley and Burton, in the nineteenth by Ellis and Postgate, and in the current century by Housman. The contribution of France also has been considerable in quality, if not in quantity—Scaliger, Huetius, Pingré: though to-day there is no eminent French student of Manilius. (...) Of the German editors we might say what Aristophanes says of the Athenian generals. (shrink)

These are not two adjectives. They are two men—or, rather, two shadows. If I said that they were two names I should be speaking inexactly. The name of Varus occurs five times in Vergil: and twice out of these five times the oldest Latin MSS. which we possess have confounded it with that of Varius. In the Vitae Vergilianae, recently edited with an adequate Apparatus Criticus, the names Varus and Varius are found, I think, twenty-eight times; and twenty-two times out (...) of these twenty-eight all, or most, of our MSS. have confused them—and that though in thirteen cases we are dealing with codices of saec. IX.–X. The same names occur four times in Quintilian, and in one case all, in another all the respectable, MSS. have got them wrong. They occur thrice in Martial—twice right, once wrong. I have selected these particular writers for a reason that will appear later. But the MSS. of Horace tell a like tale. (shrink)

One area of language research that has received a great deal of attention, both theoretical and empirical, is the use of anaphoric expressions. Such expressions can be thought of as serving two functions: the primary function is to refer back to a referent from previous discourse, and the secondary, but no less important, function is to help provide discourse coherence and structure. Third person pronouns such as he or she are anaphoric expressions par excellence, but fuller anaphoric expressions, including demonstrative (...) and definite noun phrases (NPs) such as that woman and the woman are also used in natural discourse. In this chapter we shall focus primarily on issues concerning definite NP anaphor resolution, and in particular we shall examine the interaction of two factors that are related to the identification of antecedents: the focus status of the antecedent and the semantic relationship between the antecedent and the anaphor (including semantic overlap). After presenting these factors, we will discuss one particular approach to anaphor resolution, Almor's (1999) Informational Load Hypothesis (ILH), and present three experiments that examined the findings presented in Almor (1999). The results of these experiments will lead us to consider in more detail the secondary, discourse-structuring function of anaphoric expressions. (shrink)