From: Maurice A. O'Sullivan (mauros@iol.ie)
Date: Tue Sep 14 1999 - 14:15:17 EDT
<x-flowed>At 06:51 13/09/99 -0400, you wrote:
>Thanks to Maurice for his reference to the Biblica articles. On those
>pages, there are two words as part of the contents/headings that I do not
>understand (though the rough sense is obvious; they're probably in the
>print edition also, but I've managed to ignore them there!):
>"Animadversiones" and "Commentationes." Would someone enlighten me?
Jim:
Just using the term "ecclesiastical Latin " I know is going to get me into
trouble.
Sidwell [ Sidwell, Keith. Reading Medieval Latin. Cambridge: C.U.P,
1995.)] in his introduction cites Traube's remark that "there is no such
thing as medieval Latin," and goes on to answer this point well. in his
preface.
So I will boldly quote from:
Stelten, Leo F. Dictionary of Ecclesiastical Latin. Peabody, Mass:
Hendrickson, 1995.
and show that even within this category there is an even more specialised
ecclesiastical Latin, that used by canon lawyers.
In the body of this dictionary, animadversiones is defined as:
>> animadversio -onis: f.; perception, observation; reproach, censure,
critical remark; punishment; see Appendix<<
The intro to the Appendix states:
>>The following terms and their translations and or definitions have been
gathered from a variety of sources. Most of them came from chancery offices
throughout the country in answer to a request for words and phrases that
people thought ought to be included in a handy reference book. Their use
should be to guide the user toward a general understanding; further
investigation and research may be necessary In many instances. A list of
helpful books follows this Appendix. Although most entries have a
connection with Canon Law, with either the Code of 1918 or that of 1983,
many do not.<<
And here we find a more specialized definiton:
>>animadversiones: remarks, observations; the comments of the defender of
the bond upholding the validity of a particular marriage under
investigation by a Church court.<<
Bearing in mind that the Pontifical Biblical Institute publishes "Biblica",
I think the
"defender" element is more to the fore than the colloquial sense in which
we use "animadversions against ...... "
Hope this helps.
Maurice A. O'Sullivan [ Bray, Ireland ]
mauros@iol.ie
</x-flowed>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sat Apr 20 2002 - 15:40:39 EDT