| Title | De l’ὑπόκρισις au أخذ بالوجوه. L’interprétation de l’action oratoire par Averroès dans le Commentaire moyen à la Rhétorique d’Aristote |
| Transcription | De l’hypokrisis au akhdh bi-l-wujûd. L’interprétation de l’action oratoire par Averroès dans le commentaire moyen à la Rhétorique d’Aristote |
| Type | Article |
| Language | French |
| Date | 2015 |
| Journal | Studia Graeco-Arabica |
| Volume | 5 |
| Pages | 59-76 |
| Categories | Aristotle, Rhetoric, Commentary |
| Author(s) | Frédérique Woerther |
| Publisher(s) | |
| Translator(s) |
| The notion of ὑπόκρισις (hypokrisis) was employed for the first time with the meaning of “rhetorical delivery” in Aristotle’s Rhetoric, where it is the target of a short and highly critical analysis. A practice borrowed directly from the theatre, and apparently resistant to any form of technicisation that might give it a legitimate place alongside the other means of rhetorical persuasion, ὑπόκρισις (hypokrisis) was nevertheless extremely effective–as Aristotle acknowledged with undisguised irritation. In the face of Aristotle’s ambivalence, and torn between a purist and idealist conception of rhetoric on the one hand, and the contemporary reality of speech, which required him to recognise a practice of which he could not approve, on the other, what was Averroes’ attitude in his Middle Commentary on the Rhetoric? Dependent on the Arabic version of the Rhetoric where the term ὑπόκρισις (hypokrisis) was – with one exception – translated by the expression أخذ بالوجوه (aḫḏ bi-l-wuǧūh) – “the taking of faces” –, has Averroes followed Aristotle in his hesitations and reticences? Or has he instead chosen to legitimise the use of hypokrisis in rhetorical technique? The analysis of the Rushdian interpretation of the ‘taking of faces’ will allow a better understanding of Averroes’ exegetical method, and grasp of what it meant, to him, to be faithful to the First Master. |
{"_index":"bib","_type":"_doc","_id":"2050","_score":null,"_source":{"id":2050,"authors_free":[{"id":2495,"entry_id":2050,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":1,"person_id":1286,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Fr\u00e9d\u00e9rique Woerther","free_first_name":"Fr\u00e9d\u00e9rique","free_last_name":"Woerther","norm_person":{"id":1286,"first_name":"Fr\u00e9d\u00e9rique","last_name":"Woerther","full_name":"Fr\u00e9d\u00e9rique Woerther","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":0,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/13670932X","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":1,"link":"bib?authors[]=Fr\u00e9d\u00e9rique Woerther"}}],"entry_title":"De l\u2019\u1f51\u03c0\u03cc\u03ba\u03c1\u03b9\u03c3\u03b9\u03c2 au \u0623\u062e\u0630 \u0628\u0627\u0644\u0648\u062c\u0648\u0647. L\u2019interpr\u00e9tation de l\u2019action oratoire par Averro\u00e8s dans le Commentaire moyen \u00e0 la Rh\u00e9torique d\u2019Aristote","title_transcript":"De l\u2019hypokrisis au akhdh bi-l-wuj\u00fbd. L\u2019interpr\u00e9tation de l\u2019action oratoire par Averro\u00e8s dans le commentaire moyen \u00e0 la Rh\u00e9torique d\u2019Aristote","title_translation":"","main_title":{"title":"De l\u2019\u1f51\u03c0\u03cc\u03ba\u03c1\u03b9\u03c3\u03b9\u03c2 au \u0623\u062e\u0630 \u0628\u0627\u0644\u0648\u062c\u0648\u0647. L\u2019interpr\u00e9tation de l\u2019action oratoire par Averro\u00e8s dans le Commentaire moyen \u00e0 la Rh\u00e9torique d\u2019Aristote"},"abstract":"The notion of \u1f51\u03c0\u03cc\u03ba\u03c1\u03b9\u03c3\u03b9\u03c2 (hypokrisis) was employed for the first time with the meaning of \u201crhetorical delivery\u201d in Aristotle\u2019s Rhetoric, where it is the target of a short and highly critical analysis. A practice borrowed directly from the theatre, and apparently resistant to any form of technicisation that might give it a legitimate place alongside the other means of rhetorical persuasion, \u1f51\u03c0\u03cc\u03ba\u03c1\u03b9\u03c3\u03b9\u03c2 (hypokrisis) was nevertheless extremely effective\u2013as Aristotle acknowledged with undisguised irritation. In the face of Aristotle\u2019s ambivalence, and torn between a purist and idealist conception of rhetoric on the one hand, and the contemporary reality of speech, which required him to recognise a practice of which he could not approve, on the other, what was Averroes\u2019 attitude in his Middle Commentary on the Rhetoric? Dependent on the Arabic version of the Rhetoric where the term \u1f51\u03c0\u03cc\u03ba\u03c1\u03b9\u03c3\u03b9\u03c2 (hypokrisis) was \u2013 with one exception \u2013 translated by the expression \u0623\u062e\u0630 \u0628\u0627\u0644\u0648\u062c\u0648\u0647 (a\u1e2b\u1e0f bi-l-wu\u01e7\u016bh) \u2013 \u201cthe taking of faces\u201d \u2013, has Averroes followed Aristotle in his hesitations and reticences? Or has he instead chosen to legitimise the use of hypokrisis in rhetorical technique? The analysis of the Rushdian interpretation of the \u2018taking of faces\u2019 will allow a better understanding of Averroes\u2019 exegetical method, and grasp of what it meant, to him, to be faithful to the First Master.","btype":3,"date":"2015","language":"French","online_url":"","doi_url":"","ti_url":"","categories":[{"id":21,"category_name":"Aristotle","link":"bib?categories[]=Aristotle"},{"id":48,"category_name":"Rhetoric","link":"bib?categories[]=Rhetoric"},{"id":23,"category_name":"Commentary","link":"bib?categories[]=Commentary"}],"authors":[{"id":1286,"full_name":"Fr\u00e9d\u00e9rique Woerther","role":1}],"works":[],"republication_of":null,"translation_of":null,"new_edition_of":null,"book":null,"booksection":null,"article":{"id":2050,"journal_id":null,"journal_name":"Studia Graeco-Arabica","volume":"5","issue":null,"pages":"59-76"}},"sort":[2015]}
| Title | De l’ὑπόκρισις au أخذ بالوجوه. L’interprétation de l’action oratoire par Averroès dans le Commentaire moyen à la Rhétorique d’Aristote |
| Transcription | De l’hypokrisis au akhdh bi-l-wujûd. L’interprétation de l’action oratoire par Averroès dans le commentaire moyen à la Rhétorique d’Aristote |
| Type | Article |
| Language | French |
| Date | 2015 |
| Journal | Studia Graeco-Arabica |
| Volume | 5 |
| Pages | 59-76 |
| Categories | Aristotle, Rhetoric, Commentary |
| Author(s) | Frédérique Woerther |
| Publisher(s) | |
| Translator(s) |
| The notion of ὑπόκρισις (hypokrisis) was employed for the first time with the meaning of “rhetorical delivery” in Aristotle’s Rhetoric, where it is the target of a short and highly critical analysis. A practice borrowed directly from the theatre, and apparently resistant to any form of technicisation that might give it a legitimate place alongside the other means of rhetorical persuasion, ὑπόκρισις (hypokrisis) was nevertheless extremely effective–as Aristotle acknowledged with undisguised irritation. In the face of Aristotle’s ambivalence, and torn between a purist and idealist conception of rhetoric on the one hand, and the contemporary reality of speech, which required him to recognise a practice of which he could not approve, on the other, what was Averroes’ attitude in his Middle Commentary on the Rhetoric? Dependent on the Arabic version of the Rhetoric where the term ὑπόκρισις (hypokrisis) was – with one exception – translated by the expression أخذ بالوجوه (aḫḏ bi-l-wuǧūh) – “the taking of faces” –, has Averroes followed Aristotle in his hesitations and reticences? Or has he instead chosen to legitimise the use of hypokrisis in rhetorical technique? The analysis of the Rushdian interpretation of the ‘taking of faces’ will allow a better understanding of Averroes’ exegetical method, and grasp of what it meant, to him, to be faithful to the First Master. |
{"_index":"bib","_type":"_doc","_id":"2050","_score":null,"_source":{"id":2050,"authors_free":[{"id":2495,"entry_id":2050,"agent_type":"person","is_normalised":1,"person_id":1286,"institution_id":null,"role":{"id":1,"role_name":"author"},"free_name":"Fr\u00e9d\u00e9rique Woerther","free_first_name":"Fr\u00e9d\u00e9rique","free_last_name":"Woerther","norm_person":{"id":1286,"first_name":"Fr\u00e9d\u00e9rique","last_name":"Woerther","full_name":"Fr\u00e9d\u00e9rique Woerther","short_ident":"","is_classical_name":0,"dnb_url":"http:\/\/d-nb.info\/gnd\/13670932X","viaf_url":"","db_url":"","from_claudius":1,"link":"bib?authors[]=Fr\u00e9d\u00e9rique Woerther"}}],"entry_title":"De l\u2019\u1f51\u03c0\u03cc\u03ba\u03c1\u03b9\u03c3\u03b9\u03c2 au \u0623\u062e\u0630 \u0628\u0627\u0644\u0648\u062c\u0648\u0647. L\u2019interpr\u00e9tation de l\u2019action oratoire par Averro\u00e8s dans le Commentaire moyen \u00e0 la Rh\u00e9torique d\u2019Aristote","title_transcript":"De l\u2019hypokrisis au akhdh bi-l-wuj\u00fbd. L\u2019interpr\u00e9tation de l\u2019action oratoire par Averro\u00e8s dans le commentaire moyen \u00e0 la Rh\u00e9torique d\u2019Aristote","title_translation":"","main_title":{"title":"De l\u2019\u1f51\u03c0\u03cc\u03ba\u03c1\u03b9\u03c3\u03b9\u03c2 au \u0623\u062e\u0630 \u0628\u0627\u0644\u0648\u062c\u0648\u0647. L\u2019interpr\u00e9tation de l\u2019action oratoire par Averro\u00e8s dans le Commentaire moyen \u00e0 la Rh\u00e9torique d\u2019Aristote"},"abstract":"The notion of \u1f51\u03c0\u03cc\u03ba\u03c1\u03b9\u03c3\u03b9\u03c2 (hypokrisis) was employed for the first time with the meaning of \u201crhetorical delivery\u201d in Aristotle\u2019s Rhetoric, where it is the target of a short and highly critical analysis. A practice borrowed directly from the theatre, and apparently resistant to any form of technicisation that might give it a legitimate place alongside the other means of rhetorical persuasion, \u1f51\u03c0\u03cc\u03ba\u03c1\u03b9\u03c3\u03b9\u03c2 (hypokrisis) was nevertheless extremely effective\u2013as Aristotle acknowledged with undisguised irritation. In the face of Aristotle\u2019s ambivalence, and torn between a purist and idealist conception of rhetoric on the one hand, and the contemporary reality of speech, which required him to recognise a practice of which he could not approve, on the other, what was Averroes\u2019 attitude in his Middle Commentary on the Rhetoric? Dependent on the Arabic version of the Rhetoric where the term \u1f51\u03c0\u03cc\u03ba\u03c1\u03b9\u03c3\u03b9\u03c2 (hypokrisis) was \u2013 with one exception \u2013 translated by the expression \u0623\u062e\u0630 \u0628\u0627\u0644\u0648\u062c\u0648\u0647 (a\u1e2b\u1e0f bi-l-wu\u01e7\u016bh) \u2013 \u201cthe taking of faces\u201d \u2013, has Averroes followed Aristotle in his hesitations and reticences? Or has he instead chosen to legitimise the use of hypokrisis in rhetorical technique? The analysis of the Rushdian interpretation of the \u2018taking of faces\u2019 will allow a better understanding of Averroes\u2019 exegetical method, and grasp of what it meant, to him, to be faithful to the First Master.","btype":3,"date":"2015","language":"French","online_url":"","doi_url":"","ti_url":"","categories":[{"id":21,"category_name":"Aristotle","link":"bib?categories[]=Aristotle"},{"id":48,"category_name":"Rhetoric","link":"bib?categories[]=Rhetoric"},{"id":23,"category_name":"Commentary","link":"bib?categories[]=Commentary"}],"authors":[{"id":1286,"full_name":"Fr\u00e9d\u00e9rique Woerther","role":1}],"works":[],"republication_of":null,"translation_of":null,"new_edition_of":null,"book":null,"booksection":null,"article":{"id":2050,"journal_id":null,"journal_name":"Studia Graeco-Arabica","volume":"5","issue":null,"pages":"59-76"}},"sort":["De l\u2019\u1f51\u03c0\u03cc\u03ba\u03c1\u03b9\u03c3\u03b9\u03c2 au \u0623\u062e\u0630 \u0628\u0627\u0644\u0648\u062c\u0648\u0647. L\u2019interpr\u00e9tation de l\u2019action oratoire par Averro\u00e8s dans le Commentaire moyen \u00e0 la Rh\u00e9torique d\u2019Aristote"]}