| Résumé: | <p>The main body of this thesis is a commentary on sections 1.19b-33 and 1.97-109 of Cicero's <em>De Inuentione</em>. These sections treat <em>partes orationis</em> in general (1.19b), then <em>exordium</em> (1.20-26), <em>narratio</em> (1.27-30), <em>partitio</em> (1.31-33), <em>digressio</em> (1.97), and <em>conclusio</em> (1.98-109). Due to the imposed word limit, the sections on <em>confirmatio</em> (1.34-77) and <em>reprehensio</em> (1.78-96) could not be included in the thesis.</p> <p>The structure of the commentary on each of these sections will be: introduction to the section, references to parallel passages in other Latin and Greek rhetorical texts, the most important general literature on the subject of the section, comparison of the passage in Cic.<em>Inu</em>.1 with the corresponding one in <em>Rhet.Her</em>, individual lemmata. The lemmata will cover various kinds of information, such as textual, grammatical, and linguistic issues, background information on persons, objects etc. mentioned, the young Cicero's position within the rhetorical tradition for a particular point (i.e. influence on and by Cic.<em>Inu</em>.).</p> <p>To the commentary proper, a number of introduction chapters have been added. Due to the word limit, only a selection of these can be included in the thesis: the title '<em>De Inuentione</em>' and Cicero's intention to write on all five <em>partes artis</em>; the structure of Cic.<em>Inu</em>.; subdividing the art; rhythm and clausulae; the young Cicero’s knowledge of Aristotle’s works; the relationship between Cic.<em>Inu</em>. and <em>Rhet.Her</em>. (abbreviated version); the proems of Cic.<em>Inu</em>. (abbreviated version); preliminary comments on <em>Narratio</em>; the Orestes case in the rhetorical tradition; examples in Cic.<em>Inu</em>. (abbreviated version).</p>The structure of the commentary on each of these sections will be: introduction to the section, references to parallel passages in other Latin and Greek rhetorical texts, the most important general literature on the subject of the section, comparison of the passage in Cic.Inu.1 with the corresponding one in Rhet.Her, individual lemmata. The lemmata will cover various kinds of information, such as textual, grammatical, and linguistic issues, background information on persons, objects etc. mentioned, the young Cicero’s position within the rhetorical tradition for a particular point (i.e. influence on and by Cic.Inu.). To the commentary proper, a number of introduction chapters have been added. Due to the word limit, only a selection of these can be included in the thesis: the title ‘De Inuentione’ and Cicero’s intention to write on all five partes artis; the structure of Cic.Inu.; subdividing the art; rhythm and clausulae; the young Cicero’s knowledge of Aristotle’s works; the relationship between Cic.Inu. and Rhet.Her. (abbreviated version); the proems of Cic.Inu. (abbreviated version); preliminary comments on Narratio; the Orestes case in the rhetorical tradition; examples in Cic.Inu. (abbreviated version).
|
|---|