This paper offers an interpretation of Anselm of Canterbury’s semantic doctrines in De Grammatico, paying special attention to five distinctions present in the dialogue: dicitur in eo quod quale/dicitur in eo quod quid, esse ut in subiecto/esse non ut in subiecto, significare/appellare, significare ut unum/significare non ut unum and significare per se/significare per aliud. It elucidates the theoretical role of these distinctions, showing that they are introduced with different purposes and that conflation between them must be avoided. Three specific features of this interpretation are the following: (i) an analysis of the distinction between significare and appellare in relation to the orders of intellection and predication, (ii) an account of the difference between predication in eo quod quid/in eo quod quale and essential and accidental predication, and (iii) an analysis of the thesis that ‘grammaticus’ not only signifies per se qualitas, but also per se habere.
Purchase
Buy instant access (PDF download and unlimited online access):
Institutional Login
Log in with Open Athens, Shibboleth, or your institutional credentials
Personal login
Log in with your brill.com account
Alain Galonnier, ‘(Au sujet) de Grammarien’, in Le Grammarien; De la vérité; la liberté du choix; la chute du diable: Anselme de Cantorbéry, ed. A. Galonnier, M. Corbin and R. de Ravinel (Paris, 1986), 25-49; idem, ‘Le De Grammatico et l’origine de la theorie des proprietés des termes’, in Gilbert de Poitiers et ses Contemporains: aux Origines de la Logica Modernorum, ed. J. Jolivet and A. de Libera (Naples, 1987), 353-75; idem, ‘Sur quelques aspects annonciateurs de la littérature sophismatique dans le De grammatico’, in Anselm: Aosta, Bec and Canterbury: Papers in Commemoration of the Nine-Hundredth Anniversary of Anselm’s Enthronement as Archbishop, 25 September 1093, ed. D.E. Luscombe and G. Evans (Sheffield, 1996), 209-28; Marilyn McCord Adams, ‘Re-reading De Grammatico, or Anselm’s Introduction to Aristotle’s Categories’, Documenti e studi sulla tradizione filosofica medievale 11 (2000), 83-112; John Marenbon, ‘Some Semantic Problems in Anselm’s De grammatico’, in Latin Culture in the Eleventh Century, ed. M. Herren, C. McDonough and R. Arthur (Turnhout, 2002), 73-86; Peter King, ‘Anselm’s Philosophy of Language’, in The Cambridge Companion to Anselm, ed. B. Davies and B. Leftow (Cambridge, 2004), 84-110; Peter Boschung, From a Topical Point of View: Dialectic in Anselm of Canterbury’s De Grammatico (Leiden, 2006). Cf. also Guilherme Wyllie, ‘Signification et forme logique dans le De grammatico d’Anselme de Cantorbéry’, in Anselm of Canterbury (1033-1109): Philosophical Theology and Ethics, ed. R.H. Pich (Porto Alegre, 2011), 111-18.
Angel d’Ors, ‘ ‘Non erat veritas’, ‘Non erit veritas’. Sobre las pruebas anselmianas de la eternidad de la verdad’, in Verdad, percepción, inmortalidad/Wahrheit, Wahrnehmung, Unsterblichkeit, ed. S. Castellote (Valencia, 1995), 201-14; Angel d’Ors, ‘«Omnis volens ipsum suum velle vult». A propósito del De libertate arbitrii de San Anselmo’, in “Autotrascendimiento”. Homenaje al catedrático de filosofía D. Ignacio Falgueras Salinas por su jubilación, ed. J.A. García González and J.J. Padial (Seville, 2010), 183-203.
See Sten Ebbesen, ‘The Present King of France Wears Hypothetical Shoes with Categorical Laces’, in Topics in Latin Philosophy from the 12th-14th Centuries. Collected Essays of Sten Ebbesen. Volume 2 (Farnham, 2009), 15-30 (originally published in Medioevo in 1981).
All Time | Past 365 days | Past 30 Days | |
---|---|---|---|
Abstract Views | 409 | 74 | 11 |
Full Text Views | 181 | 1 | 0 |
PDF Views & Downloads | 39 | 5 | 0 |
This paper offers an interpretation of Anselm of Canterbury’s semantic doctrines in De Grammatico, paying special attention to five distinctions present in the dialogue: dicitur in eo quod quale/dicitur in eo quod quid, esse ut in subiecto/esse non ut in subiecto, significare/appellare, significare ut unum/significare non ut unum and significare per se/significare per aliud. It elucidates the theoretical role of these distinctions, showing that they are introduced with different purposes and that conflation between them must be avoided. Three specific features of this interpretation are the following: (i) an analysis of the distinction between significare and appellare in relation to the orders of intellection and predication, (ii) an account of the difference between predication in eo quod quid/in eo quod quale and essential and accidental predication, and (iii) an analysis of the thesis that ‘grammaticus’ not only signifies per se qualitas, but also per se habere.
All Time | Past 365 days | Past 30 Days | |
---|---|---|---|
Abstract Views | 409 | 74 | 11 |
Full Text Views | 181 | 1 | 0 |
PDF Views & Downloads | 39 | 5 | 0 |