Letteratura scientifica selezionata sul tema "Wine – Quotations, maxims"

Maximus of Tyre (fl. late 2nd century ad) is most poorly and confusedly attested in ancient sources. The best testimony to be found is his extant collection of 41 Orationes, or Dissertationes, addressing a wide range of topics, including the issue of ‘Socrates’ daimonion’ (Or. 8–9), which has been also dealt with by Maximus’ fellow Platonists of the Middle stage Plutarchus of Chaeronea (46 – after 119), in De Socratis demonio, and Apuleius of Madauros (c. 124 – c. 170), in De deo Socratis. All of them, with slight variations, consider demons intermediary beings shuttling between heavens and earth, gods and humans; at one point, Maximus compares them to translators who ensure contacts between people of different cultures. Maximus’ Platonism mainly manifests in his attempts to mould his own writings in the spirit and style of Plato’s works. The style is paramount for Maximus, him being not only a Platonist, but also a prominent representative of the Second Sophistic. As an eclectic philosopher, he introduces into his writings sundry Aristotelean and Stoic threads interwoven with Platonic warp and woof. Revealing himself a widely educated person, Maximus shows a good knowledge of Plato as well as other ancient authors, whose many fragments are extant solely thanks to his quotations. Maximus is scarcely known in the Russian language: a few translations of the last century are based on an obsolescent edition. As an appendix, a new Russian translation of Or. 8–9 based on thoroughly corrected editions of Maximus’ text is provided.

Kasijan Sakovyč (сa. 1578–1647) can rightfully be attributed to one of the most educated representatives of both Orthodox and Uniate monasticism in Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth of the first third of the 17th century. Kasijan’s diversity in terms of literary genres reflects his wide knowledge. Thus, his polemical treatises against the Orthodox Church and, partly, against the Uniates, echoed the events of his personal biography: after 1625, Sakovyč converted from Orthodox Christianity to the Uniate Church; in 1640, he became a Catholic. Two textbooks (compilations from Pseudo-Aristoteles) were partly related to his teaching activity and rectorship at Kyiv Brotherhood school. A rhymed funeral eulogy for the Hetman of Zaporozhian Cossacks, Petro Sahaidachny, testifies to Kasijan’s poetic talents. The present article aims to investigate Sakovyč’s writings as a means to reconstruct his personal “resource” or texts or books that he read and used in his literary activity. Two prefaces by Kasijan (a dedication to the nobleman Aleksander Zasławski and an appeal to the ‘pious reader’) are used for this case study, both written for “Desiderosus, abo Scieszka do miłości Bożey” (Desiderosus or a Path to God’s Love) (Kraków, 1625). The work is a Polish translation of an anonymous Spanish treatise ca. 1515, which was prepared by Kasper Wilkowski (died after 1589) and published three times during the late 16th century. Attributing Latin phrases, maxims, quotations, and references to historical figures and works, visual images, etc., that are used in both prefaces, allows one to suggest what books were known and available to Sakovyč and could have been the source of his erudition.

The article concretizes the concept of essay as a journalistic genre, outlines its specific genre features. Research on the stylistics of essay texts by various authors is analyzed. It is stated that essays are considered mainly from the point of view of the theory of journalism and literary criticism, the general linguistic and stylistic features of the essay text have not been outlined yet. The aim of the article was to determine the structural-compositional, syntactic, lexical-semantic, phraseological linguistic means used in the essay. The essay is interpreted as a small artistic and journalistic prose work on abstract-philosophical, aesthetic, literary-ethical theme, which has an arbitrary composition and reproduces the personal thoughts and impressions of the author on a particular occasion or issue, and is not an exhaustive and defining interpretation of the theme. The features of the essay, such as the logic of the opinion, are identified; attention to the artistic form of the text; subjective judgment of the author about an object; the possibility of involving the general cultural context of the background knowledge of the addressee; ease of speech; imagery, aphorisms, metaphors, etc. The structural and compositional means of the essay are outlined, which include the argumentative nature of the unfolding of the text, which is manifested in the logical acts of comparison, opposition, analogy, proof; in the judgments and reflections of the addressee of the speech; key sentences that determine the theme and content of the work; means of communication, including repetitions, parallel constructions, antitheses. The syntactic means of essay texts include inversion of words, rhetorical questions, sentences with different types of syntactic connection, exclamatory statements; means of expressive syntax are represented by ellipse, repetitions, gradation, inversion, parallel constructions. It is noted that the most expressive lexical and semantic feature of this genre is the wide expressive possibilities of the artistic word, in particular imagery. Therefore, at the lexical-semantic and phraseological levels, the characteristic means of the essay are the constant use of tropes: metaphors, personifications, comparisons, epithets, symbolic and allegorical images. A striking feature of the essay text is intertextuality, which finds expression in aphorisms, sentences, maxims, quotations. Keywords: essay, essays, essay genre, essay text, linguistic and stylistic features of the essay.

Maximus of Tyre (fl. late 2nd century ad) is most poorly and confusedly attested by ancient sources. The best testimony to be found is his extant collection of 41 Orationes, or Dissertationes, addressing a wide range of topics, including the issue of ‘Socratic love’ (Or. 18–21), i.e. of Plato’s theory of eros dealt with by the latter, imprimis, in his dialogues Symposium and Phaedrus. Maximus of Tyre may be dubbed a ‘Platonist’, though not in a scholastic vein (as, e.g., his contemporary and sometime neighbour in the manuscripts Albinus), but rather as an author who strived to mould his own writings in the spirit and style of Plato’s works. The author closest to Maximus may have been Favorinus of Arelate (ca. 80 – ca. 160). As a widely educated person, Maximus shows a good knowledge of Plato as well as of other ancient authors, whose many fragments (e.g., of Sappho and Anacreon) are extant solely thanks to his quotations. Maximus is scarcely known in the Russian language: a few translations of the last century are based on an obsolescent edition. As an appendix, a new Russian translation of Or. 20–21 based on seriously corrected editions of Maximus’ text is provided.

In this chapter, we offer a summary of the book’s results and conclusions, ask what future developments might be contemplated, both theoretical and experimental, and provide some scientific quotations which seemed relevant. The quotations are collected here rather than dispersed through the text, because some of them apply at several junctures and one or two apply to the whole book. It is hoped that they will underline some important points in a memorable and even entertaining manner. Application of generalized scale invariance to large amounts of research quality in situ airborne observations of the free troposphere and lower stratosphere has shown that the atmosphere behaves as a random, non-Gaussian, Lévy stable process. The scaling exponents describing the resultant statistical multifractality are the conservation H1, the intermittency C1 and the departure from monofractality α, the Lévy exponent. They had average values of 0.55, 0.05, and 1.6 respectively as deduced from airborne time series of wind speed and temperature. Certain regimes, such as jet streams, however showed correlation within the mean; the value of H1(s) for horizontal wind speed s was positively correlated with the magnitude of the horizontal speed shear and the value of H1(T ) for temperature was positively correlated with the meridional (equator-to-pole) temperature gradient. The value of H1(s) in the vertical showed clear correlation with vertical measures of jet stream strength, such as depth and maximum speed. The vertical scaling of temperature showed the paramount influence of gravity, having H1 close to unity, while horizontal wind speed and relative humidity were about 0.75. These results show that large scale ordered flow can be interpreted as emerging from less ordered smaller scale motions. At the same time, the smaller scale motions are never truly random in the atmosphere and the larger scale motions are never perfectly correlated, smooth flow. Ozone and water, while occasionally behaving as passive scalars, that is to say as tracers, more often showed the presence of sources and sinks: a numerical model-independent demonstration of the operation of photochemistry and precipitation respectively.

The article is devoted to the one of the most contradictory and controversial portraits of A.M. Gorky who in 1927 set to the Dutch self-taught artist Christian Victor Kragballe Haagen-Müller (1894–1959). It became clear from letter of the artist’s wife that in 1927 her husband and she came to Italy for the purpose of painting a portrait of the proletarian writer, the Revolution Stormy Petrel, and at the day of the writer’s 60th anniversary two identical color lithographs of its sketches were presented to A.M. Gorky. “Many people made my portraits all of which were not good”, — the writer shared his impressions with P.D. Korin, as if remembering his short-term acquaintance with the Dutch artist. Gorky’s appraisal of Haagen-Müller’s work became an axiomatic quotation: “The explanations on the subject why Gorky became so pale are to be required from the artist!” — and implies the evident rejection of the artistic interpretation of the writer’s image. Which circumstances brought to such peremptory comments of the portrait? Was it inactivity, apathy and restraint of A.M. Gorky, even in the portrait space, still implying him, the literary and public isolation provoked by the fascists? Or was it the influence of the fashionable tendencies in painting like cubism which caused the persistent rejection of the realist writer? Or maybe, the proletarian writer understood the portrait as a political contract, since the fascism rapidly conquering the world with its breaking of the usual human reality, was denounced by the writer as “the denial of the culture and the sermon of the war”?