|
ИСТИНА |
Войти в систему Регистрация |
Интеллектуальная Система Тематического Исследования НАукометрических данных |
||
Ранняя кельтская эпиграфика как объект лингвистического и историко-культурного анализакнига
- Автор: Михайлова Т.А.
- Год издания: 2017
- Место издания: Издательский Дом ЯСК Москва
- Объём: 312 страниц (19,5 печатных листов)
- ISBN: 978-5-9908826-8-3
- Тираж: 300 экз.
- Монография
- По постановлению РИСО
- Аннотация: Т.А. Mikhailova Filia carissima: Studies in Early Celtic Epigraphy Summary The present edition is actually what the title suggests: it is a series of essays on a range of early Celtic inscriptions, united by the same idea: namely, that an epigraphic record should be treated in a multifaceted way – as both text as such (a linguistic perspective) and a material object, an artefact coming from a specific cultural background (a historical-cultural perspective). The work is far from claiming extensive coverage of the data. It leaves out the abundance of Gaulish votive inscriptions, Gaulish calendars, cursing tablets, Gaulish and Brittonic personal names found in the corpus of Latin inscriptions. Early Goidelic inscriptions in Ogam are only covered in some essays addressed to those readers who have at least superficial knowledge of the subject. No consideration is given to inscriptions made by the Celtic people of Iberian peninsula in Iberian script – this is a specific and very complicated issue. However the texts presented and analyzed in my work seem to me illustrative enough, so that the reader could get the idea of the nature of Celtic inscriptions from the 2nd to 4th centuries A.D., both Continental and Insular. At the same time, the collection of sixteen chapters, or, rather, essays, fitting into four sections of unequal size, makes, in my opinion, a single text united by several shared methodological assumptions and a shared approach to the material, not to mention the recurring cross-references between the sections. While working on the book, I had inevitably to face the inconsistencies in understanding what Epigraphy exactly means as a term. It is often understood as the choice of writing a text over a medium that is ‘unconventional’ from the modern perspective (stone, wood, beeswax, lead etc.), on the one hand, along with the relatively limited pragmatics of the text-writing itself, on the other (epitaphs, curses, votive inscriptions, owners’ marks etc.) Etymologically, it is derived from the Greek word for ‘inscription’, literally, ‘written over’, which defines this field of linguistics (as well as textual criticism and archaeology) as an auxiliary science of history, engaged in the studies of inscriptions over hard materials and categorizing them in accordance with their chronological and cultural contexts. Yet, from my viewpoint, this is not exactly the case. Or, rather, within the ‘auxiliary’ science itself, there is a clearly identifiable supplementary part: studying not so much the text as, specifically, the in-scription which is most often unique and singular in its functioning, not subject to copying, even despite the fact that many inscriptions were made after the pre-existing formulae. S. Franklin, the author of a monograph on writing in Old Rus’, gives the following classification of types of writing (presumably, all over the world): thus, he recognises as ‘primary writing’ that on the objects specifically intended to serve as media for written messages. These are manuscripts, birch-bark letters, waxed wooden tablets or clay cuneiform tablets. ‘Secondary writing’ embraces the cases where “writing is integral to, but not the main purpose of, the object’s production; these are objects created with writing but not necessarily for writing” (coins, seals, labelled images). Finally, ‘tertiary writing’ means written messages on objects that had been created before for purpose other than writing. Most of tertiary writing is in the form of graffiti, although some of more monumental inscriptions fit into this category too [Franklin 2002: 20-21]. So Franklin’s classification suggests that true epigraphy is something second-, if not third-rate, appearing a marginal thing which only emerged after true literacy had been adopted as a means of keeping and transmitting information. Partially, it is true, but at the same time, not so much – or, rather, not always the case.
- Добавил в систему: Михайлова Татьяна Андреевна
Прикрепленные файлы
| № | Имя | Описание | Имя файла | Размер | Добавлен |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1. | Mikhailova._Filia_carissima_oCPrLAI.pdf | Mikhailova._Filia_carissima_oCPrLAI.pdf | 24,3 МБ | 3 декабря 2017 [tamih.msu] | |
| 2. | Mikhailova._Filia_carissima.pdf | Mikhailova._Filia_carissima.pdf | 24,3 МБ | 26 ноября 2017 [tamih.msu] |