TRA

 

Catalogue Raisonné of J. L. Speranza’s Publications – H. P. Grice e J. L. Speranza: La Conversazione – I Verbali: Tra

 

Speranza, J. L. (n. d.). ‘H. P. Grice e J. L. Speranza: La Conversazione – I Verbali: Trabalza – Ossia: Grice e Trabalza: grammatica razionale ed implicatura conversazionale. Note sulla Storia della grammatica italiana. Il Gruppo di Gioco di H. P. Grice. Ciro Trabalza (Bevagna, Perugia, Umbria): grammatica razionale ed implicatura conversazionale. A comparison between H. P. Grice and Ciro Trabalza on reason‑governed conversational meaning brings into view two complementary ways of grounding rationality in language. Grice’s theory, articulated in “Logic and Conversation,” treats conversational meaning as governed by rational expectations shared by competent speakers: syntactic form matters, but it matters because speakers assume one another to be reasoning agents who exploit grammar to convey more than is strictly said, through implicature calculable by appeal to purpose, relevance, and mutual recognition. Trabalza, from the very different vantage point of historical and rational grammar, approaches language as a system whose syntactic categories are not arbitrary but reflect deeper ontological and cognitive categories, an assumption rooted in the Italian tradition of grammatica razionale and reinforced by Crocean aesthetics. Where Grice theorizes implicature as a dynamic product of conversational rationality in use, Trabalza treats grammar itself as already imbued with rational form, so that interpretation is guided by historically sedimented structures rather than moment‑to‑moment conversational calculation alone. The convergence lies in their shared resistance to a purely formalist or mathematically “washed” view of language: both reject the idea that syntax is neutral with respect to meaning, and both see linguistic structure as answerable to human reason. The difference is one of emphasis: Grice foregrounds the pragmatic intelligence of speakers negotiating meaning in context, while Trabalza foregrounds the rational dignity of grammatical systems as repositories of intelligibility that make such negotiations possible in the first place. Grice: “Russell always made fun of our stone-age metaphysics. Physics, strictly. Ad there’s nothing funny about it, if we think of SYNTACTIC CATEGORIES as reflecting ONTOLOGICAL CATEGORIES – something that goes beyond Baron Russell’s mathematically-washed brain!” Ciro Trabalza (Bevagna – m. Roma -- è stato un grammatico e critico letterario italiano. Consegue la laurea in lettere all'Università di Roma. Negli anni successivi insegnò in varie scuole secondarie di Empoli, Modena, Perugia e Padova, prima di intraprendere la carriera amministrativa, quale ispettore centrale del Ministero della pubblica istruzione e poi come direttore generale per la scuola media e per gli scambi culturali con l'estero. Nel corso dell'incarico ministeriale, ebbe il particolare merito di dar vita agli Istituti italiani di cultura all'estero, tuttora esistenti ed operativi nella maggior parte delle città capitali del mondo, con la funzione precipua di diffondere la lingua e la cultura italiana all'estero.  Come studioso si occupò di grammatica storica della lingua italiana e di critica letteraria, dal Boccaccio al Rinascimento e a tutto il secolo diciassettesimo. Appare evidente l'ispirazione crociana della critica estetica di T.. Il suo nome peraltro è soprattutto legato alla diffusa e discussa Storia della grammatica italiana, che Alfredo Schiaffini tra gli altri ebbe a definire «poderosa e severa»[3]. Ciro Trabalza svolse altresì un'assidua attività pubblicistica e diresse, tra l'altro, la rivista «Problemi della scuola e della cultura.  Opere Della vita e delle opere di Torti, Bevagna, Studi e profili, Torino, Paravia, Saggio di vocabolario umbro-italiano e viceversa, Bologna, Forni, Studi sul Boccaccio, Città di Castello, S. Lapi, Storia della grammatica italiana, Milano, Hoepli, La critica letteraria, dai primordi dell'Umanesimo a tutto il secolo diciassettesimo, Milano, Vallardi, Dipanatura critiche, Bologna, Cappelli, 1920. la grammatica razionale di Grice, ‘Logic and conversation,’ repinted in Davidson and Harman, Logic and Grammar!  G.: Let us begin where the thing begins, which is not with Croce, not with Vossler, not even with Torti, but with a young man from Bevagna entering the Palazzo della Sapienza in 1894 and discovering that antiquarianism can be an alibi for a life. S.: A life, or a laurea. G.: In Rome those can briefly coincide. Ciro Trabalza is twenty-two or twenty-three, depending on the month; he has Monaci over him, the Sapienza around him, and Francesco Torti in front of him like a perfectly chosen excuse. S.: “Excuse” is very good. It sounds less pious than “subject.” G.: Quite. Every good thesis has an official object and a real motive. Officially, the object is Torti. Really, the motive is language. S.: Language, or grammar. G.: Exactly. And not grammar in the schoolroom sense only, but grammar as a way of entering the question of how Italian became thinkable as a historical and rational object. S.: Still, if one told an ignoramus that Trabalza’s laurea was on Della vita e delle opere di Francesco Torti di Bevagna, the ignoramus would say: ah, another dust-covered local worthy. G.: The ignoramus would be wrong in the usual way: by being too literal. Torti is local in provenance and strategic in significance. S.: Explain strategic. G.: Torti lets Trabalza do three things at once. He can honour a fellow Umbrian; he can enter the questione della lingua; and he can begin, under Monaci, the long move from literary-historical retrieval to the history of grammar. S.: So the local author is really a gateway drug. G.: Precisely. A scholar begins by writing on a minor figure and ends by re-describing the whole tradition that made that figure matter. S.: And Monaci, sitting there in the Sapienza, knew this. G.: I think so. Monaci was too shrewd a philologist to waste a gifted student on a merely decorative topic. S.: Let us fix the scene. Trabalza, born 1871, laurea in 1894, in Lettere, at the Sapienza, in the Palazzo. G.: Yes. And the Palazzo matters, because the old Roman university still housed the humanities in a building that made learning feel both administrative and ceremonial. S.: You like buildings too much. G.: Buildings are merely grammar in stone. S.: Ah, now we are at Trabalza. G.: We never left him. S.: But why Torti? Why not someone grander, if the point is really the history of language? G.: Because grandeur can be paralysing. Torti is the right size. Large enough to connect with the national debate, small enough to need rescue. S.: A rescuable author. G.: Exactly. And a useful one. Torti is anti-purist in the early nineteenth-century sense, which means he is fighting the reduction of Italian to a narrow Trecento-Crusca norm. S.: Purism then is basically Crusca-Firenze-Trecento? G.: Broadly, yes. Not just a dictionary preference, but a whole ideology of authority: old Tuscan as normative, modern innovations under suspicion, non-sanctioned usage treated as contamination. S.: So anti-purism is not “let everyone say whatever he likes.” G.: No. It is not linguistic anarchy. It is resistance to the tyranny of one sanctified model. S.: Which is already more interesting than I thought. G.: Naturally. Torti is not defending bad Italian. He is defending the legitimacy of living Italian against antiquarian over-policing. S.: And this is where the history of language enters, not merely literary taste. G.: Exactly. If you reduce Torti to literary history, you miss the point. He is arguing about what Italian may become. S.: So Trabalza’s thesis is not merely “life and works.” It is really “life and works as entry into a regime of linguistic normativity.” G.: Admirably put. S.: I am improving. G.: Against my better judgment. Now, what Trabalza later does in Storia della grammatica italiana is to broaden that local strategic move into a national historical one. S.: And there the title is crucial: grammar, not literature. G.: Yes, though in Italy of that period grammar and literary history are never cleanly divorced. S.: Because Croce enters. G.: Precisely. Once Croce says that language is expression, grammar is no longer merely a list of forms. It becomes secondary reflection on expressive activity. S.: And then “pure” versus “impure” language begins to look philosophically vulgar. G.: At least in the strongest Crocean light. If every genuine utterance is an individual act of expression, then the old purist tribunal begins to lose absolute authority. S.: So Croce updates Torti by changing the level of the fight. G.: Exactly. Torti says: do not let Crusca tyrannise living language. Croce says: the very notion of an externally policed language is philosophically secondary to expression itself. S.: And Vossler? G.: Vossler philosophises and internationalises the move. He takes the idealist conception of language as expression and turns it into a philosophy of language in which style and spiritual form displace merely external rule. S.: And Trabalza stands between the old anti-purist debate and the newer idealist re-description. G.: Yes. That is why he is more interesting than a mere antiquarian. He writes the history of grammar after grammar has become philosophically unstable. S.: “Philosophically unstable” is nice. G.: It means grammar can no longer pretend to be merely a technology of correctness. S.: Yet Trabalza still writes a history of grammar, not an anti-grammar manifesto. G.: Because history is his way of making the problem visible. He does not abolish grammar. He historicises the ways Italians have tried to rationalise language. S.: So by the time he writes his grande opera, grammar has become a history of rationalisations. G.: Better: a history of how linguistic reflection oscillates between rule, expression, canon, and usage. S.: Which sounds surprisingly Gricean. G.: At a high enough altitude, yes. Grice would be interested whenever syntactic categories are taken as answerable to rational or ontological ones. S.: Though Grice is not a Crocean. G.: Certainly not. He would distrust the rhetoric of pure expression. But he would be fascinated by the tension between living use and codified form. S.: Whereas Torti, by contrast, is not asking Wood’s question: what is the force of linguistic rules. G.: Exactly. Torti is not an Oxford analyst. He is fighting over which norms should govern literary and linguistic legitimacy. S.: While O. P. Wood asks what sort of force a linguistic rule has at all. G.: Which is a very different question. Wood is conceptual; Torti is ideological and cultural. S.: That is what I meant before. Reading Torti in the light of Ryle and Wood may be unfair. G.: Unfair but illuminating. It shows the difference between asking “which usage should count?” and asking “what is it for a rule of use to bind?” S.: So Trabalza, if he follows Torti, follows him as historian of linguistic controversy, not as analyst of rule-force. G.: Precisely. S.: Yet Croce and Vossler drag the whole matter upward into philosophy of language. G.: They do. And that is why Trabalza’s Storia della grammatica italiana is not simply a museum of old schoolmasters. It is written in a world where grammar has become answerable to aesthetics, expression, and historicity. S.: Which is why one finds De Sanctis and similar figures there. G.: Yes. Because grammar has become entangled with criticism, national culture, and the philosophy of expression. S.: I can now see why the young Trabalza in 1894 might lock himself in the Palazzo with Torti. G.: “Lock himself in” is too dramatic. He was properly supervised by Monaci. S.: Which is a Roman way of being imprisoned. G.: Quite. S.: Tell me again about Monaci. G.: Ernesto Monaci, born in Soriano nel Cimino, not Vicovaro as I once unfortunately misplaced him; Roman philologist, formidable teacher, and exactly the man to direct a gifted Umbrian toward a strategically chosen nineteenth-century anti-purist. S.: So the story is almost too tidy. Umbrian student, Roman philologist, Umbrian anti-purist, laurea in the Palazzo. G.: Tidy stories are often historically true in outline and messy in implication. S.: Which is where your beloved implicature enters. G.: Naturally. A thesis on Torti in 1894 says more than “here is Torti.” It says: here is a young scholar placing himself within the history of language by way of a recoverable but not overworked figure. S.: And does the thesis actually help Torti’s afterlife? G.: In a limited but real way, yes. It does not canonise him universally, but it consolidates the dossier. After Trabalza, anyone wanting Torti has a modern monograph to start from. S.: Bibliographical consolidation rather than glory. G.: Exactly. Which is the commonest form of scholarly immortality. S.: Better than being unread on a shelf. G.: Marginally. S.: Now let me try an Oxford analogy. If the OED is descriptive and purism is prescriptive with a moral halo, where does Trabalza stand? G.: Trabalza is neither simple descriptivist nor simple prescriptivist. He is a historian of how Italians theorised grammar, under conditions where the force of norm and the reality of usage were both in dispute. S.: So he is not saying: “Here is the pure form; indoctrinate accordingly.” G.: No. That would be the old purist line. S.: Nor is he simply saying: “Record whatever people say.” G.: No. That would be too lexicographical and too thin. S.: Then he is showing how systems of normativity arose, fought, changed, and philosophically reinterpreted themselves. G.: Exactly so. S.: Which is why Croce and Vossler are not decorative appendices but essential background. G.: Yes. Without them you miss why a history of grammar in the early twentieth century could be intellectually ambitious rather than merely compilatory. S.: And that ambition reaches back to Torti? G.: In mediated form. Torti becomes retrospectively legible as an early challenger of purist closure, and Croce makes that challenge more philosophically radical by reconceiving language as expression. S.: So they are not simply repeating Torti. They are translating him upward. G.: Nicely said. Torti fights over linguistic legitimacy inside an older controversy. Croce and Vossler shift the fight into the ontology of language itself. Trabalza historicises the road between the two. S.: Which makes Storia della grammatica italiana less a grammar-book than a history of attempted self-consciousness about language. G.: Exactly. It is the history of Italy trying to know what it was doing when it codified, criticised, purified, relaxed, aestheticised, and nationalised its language. S.: That sounds far better than “a book about old grammarians.” G.: Most good books are misdescribed by lazy nouns. S.: There is still something deliciously comic about the young Trabalza getting a degree through Torti. G.: Degrees are often won through strategically chosen dead men. S.: And is Torti then a philosopher? G.: Not in the strict technical sense. Philosophically minded, yes; philosophically central, no. He is a figure in the history of linguistic and literary ideas. S.: Which is enough. G.: More than enough, if one knows what one is doing. S.: That phrase should be carved over the Sapienza. G.: The Sapienza needs no more carving. It has survived enough inscriptions already. S.: Let us return to Oxford for a moment. Wood on the force of linguistic rules, Ryle on use and usage, Grice on conversational normativity. Where does Trabalza look from there? G.: Distant but not irrelevant. Trabalza does not ask what gives a rule its force in the conceptual sense Wood asks. But he shows the historical sediment from which later arguments about grammatical normativity emerge. S.: So he supplies ancestry, not analysis. G.: Yes. Though ancestry can itself be analytic when properly narrated. S.: And Grice, if he read Trabalza, would perhaps be amused by the thought that grammar had been philosophically dignified in Italy before Oxford decided to make “use” fashionable. G.: Very likely. He would also appreciate the anti-purist suspicion that authorised form is not the whole truth about rational communication. S.: Which is where Torti becomes unexpectedly modern. G.: Modern enough to deserve recovery, not modern enough to become Wood. S.: Good. I like that. “Not modern enough to become Wood.” G.: You may keep it. S.: And we still end where we began: Trabalza. G.: We must. Because the point of all the intermediaries is to show that Trabalza is not a footnote to Torti, but the historian who makes Torti speak again under new philosophical weather. S.: In 1894 he gets his degree by rescuing a strategically useful anti-purist. G.: Yes. S.: Later he writes a history of grammar under Crocean and post-Crocean pressure. G.: Yes. S.: And the ignorant think this is mere antiquarian pro-Trecento literary dust. G.: They always do, until they notice that the “dust” is what remains after a whole nation has fought over what its language is allowed to be. S.: So the punchline is that the Palazzo gave him a laurea, Torti gave him a route, Croce gave him altitude, and grammar gave him a civilisation to narrate. G.: Exactly. S.: And this, you would say, is why Trabalza matters. G.: Yes. He begins with Torti and ends by teaching us that grammar is never only grammar. S.: Which means we have ended with Trabalza. G.: As we were always meant to.Grice: Caro Trabalza, devo confessarti che raramente ho letto qualcosa di così stimolante e profondo come le tue incursioni filosofiche nei dettagli grammaticali del latino e dell’italiano. Mi hanno affascinato al punto da tentare – non senza difficoltà – di applicare simili sottigliezze alle lingue più “barbare” che si parlano attorno al Vadum Boum, quella strana espressione con cui, quasi per gioco, chiamavamo Oxford tra amici. In fondo, è come dire: dove il fiume scorre e i buoi passano, la lingua si rinnova, ma non sempre si nobilita. Trabalza: Grice, le tue parole sono un balsamo per l’anima di chi, come me, crede nella dignità filosofica della grammatica. La tua attenzione verso le «categorie sintattiche» che, a ben vedere, riflettono le «categorie ontologiche» mi fa sentire compreso. E se anche nelle lingue di Vadum Boum – Oxford – si tentano queste alchimie, vuol dire che la nostra ricerca ha davvero un respiro universale. Grice: Esatto, Trabalza! In fondo, ogni volta che scandagliamo la struttura di una lingua, cerchiamo di dare senso all’esperienza umana. Anche Russell, con il suo cervello matematicamente lavato, non riusciva a cogliere quanto la grammatica possa essere fonte di verità filosofica. Forse, proprio tra le declinazioni latine e le sottigliezze italiane, troviamo quella ragione conversazionale che illumina anche gli idiomi più recalcitranti. Trabalza: Grice, è proprio in questo dialogo tra grammatico e filosofo che si fa strada la vera implicatura. La grammatica razionale non è solo regola, ma anche interpretazione, come insegna la critica crociana. E se la lingua italiana, con le sue mille sfumature, si diffonde nel mondo grazie all’impegno di chi crede nella conversazione civile, allora abbiamo costruito davvero un ponte tra la ragione italiana e quella universale. Trabalza, Ciro (1894). Torti. Sotto Monaci. Sapienza Roma.

 

Speranza, J. L. (n. d.). ‘H. P. Grice e J. L. Speranza: La Conversazione – I Verbali: Tragella – Ossia: Grice e Tragella: la ragione conversazionale e l’implicatura conversazional dei caduti. Note su La critica letteraria in Italia. Il Gruppo di Gioco di H. P. Grice. Padre Cesare Tragella (Trezzano sul Naviglio, Milano, Lombardia): la ragione conversazionale e l’implicatura conversazional dei caduti – A comparison between Grice and Cesare Tragella on reason‑governed conversational meaning turns on the way rationality is anchored in lived practice rather than abstract system. For Grice, conversational rationality is articulated through the idea that meaning in conversation is governed by reasons that participants expect one another to recognize: implicature arises because speakers are taken to be rational agents, oriented toward shared purposes, and capable of allowing what is meant to exceed what is said without collapsing into sentimentality. In the autobiographical episode surrounding the death of the original best man and Grice’s meeting his future wife, rational talk about loss is inseparable from tacit understanding, restraint, and shared recognition of what cannot be fully voiced; the fallen are present through implicature rather than proclamation. Tragella’s work on the caduti, by contrast, situates conversational reason within historical and devotional practice: memorialization, architecture, letters, and liturgical language are reason‑guided forms of address in which silence, gesture, and place do as much rational work as explicit assertion. Where Grice theorizes implicature as a mechanism of cooperative intelligibility, Tragella embodies it as an ethical duty of remembrance, in which the absence of the fallen continually calls for rational response without rhetorical excess. The convergence lies in their shared refusal of empty rhetoric: for both, reason governs conversation precisely when it allows memory, loss, and moral seriousness to be conveyed indirectly, through forms that respect both understanding and dignity. Grice italo per i caduti. Grice, “How I met my wife.” As it happens, Grice was a student at Merton. A younger recipient of the same Senior scholarship, J. S. Watson, called him on short noice to fulfil the task of best man – seeing that the original best man had been killed in action shortly before. It was a Watson’s wedding that Grice met his future wife. While Grice himself was engaged  in action in the North Atlantic, he was transferred to the Admiralty for the remaining of the duration of the war.  Studia a Gorla Minore, Milano, e Torino. Si occupa di serbare la memoria della battaglia di Magenta con la costruzione di una cappella espiatoria all'interno della chiesa per accogliere le spoglie dei caduti. Ricovero vecchi poveri Sito Lombardia Beni Culturali.  Viviani, cfr. Tunesi, Morani Le stagioni, op. cit.. T., Lettera a Murri in: Murri, L. Bedeschi, Carteggio. II. Lettere a Murri. Roma, Edizioni di Storia e Letteratura, Le stagioni di un prete, Le stagioni di un prete, «Rivista di storia e letteratura religiosa», Viviani, Dalle ricerche la prima storia vera, Magenta, Zeisciu. per i caduti. Grice: Caro Tragella, sai, raramente mi sento così a mio agio come con te nel parlare dei caduti. Forse solo tu puoi capire quello che si prova, perché per me non è solo filosofia, ma storia viva: ho visto amici cadere in mare, uno di loro era destinato a essere il testimone a un matrimonio, ma il destino… beh, ha scelto per tutti noi. E proprio lì, tra il dolore e la memoria, ho incontrato anche la donna che sarebbe diventata mia moglie. Tragella: Grice, la tua confidenza mi onora e commuove. Anche per me, la memoria dei caduti non è un esercizio di retorica, ma un dovere del cuore e della ragione. Ho consacrato la mia vita a conservare il loro ricordo, perché siano sempre celebrati non solo come eroi, ma come uomini la cui assenza ci interroga ogni giorno. Grice: Allora brindiamo, caro amico, al coraggio di chi ci ha preceduto e a quella strana fraternità che ci lega, al di là delle parole e della filosofia. Ogni gesto di memoria è un gesto di vita, e oggi sento che non siamo soli nel nostro ricordo. Tragella: Esattamente, Grice. Che il nostro brindisi sia un inno silenzioso ai caduti e un segno di speranza per chi resta. La storia li ricorda, la filosofia li onora, ma il cuore—solo il cuore—li rende eterni. Tragella, Cesare (1874). Ordination. Milano

 

Speranza, J. L. (n. d.). ‘H. P. Grice e J. L. Speranza: La Conversazione – I Verbali: Traio – Ossia: Grice e Traio – Grex griceiana – verbalia: Traio. The gens Traia was an obscure plebeian family at ancient Rome. No members of this gens are mentioned by Roman writers, but several are known from inscriptions.  Origin The nomen Traius belongs to a large class of gentilicia formed using the suffix -aius, which was typical of Oscan names.[1] Epigraphy places some of the Traii in Samnium, an Oscan-speaking region of Italy.[2][3]  Praenomina All of the Traii known from inscriptions bore very common praenomina, including Lucius, Gaius, Marcus, and Quintus.  Branches and cognomina A family of this gens settled in Hispania by the Augustan era, where they achieved some local importance at Italica and Arva in Baetica. Gaius Traius Pollio was one of the duumvirs at Italica,[4] while Quintus Traius Areianus was honoured with a statue at Arva.[5] The cognomen Pollio was an old Latin surname originally derived from the occupation of the bearer, indicating a polisher.[6] Areianus, which belonged to at least two generations of the family from Arva, probably commemorated their descent from the Areia gens. Similarly, the surname Trajanus, borne by a family of the Ulpia gens from Tuder in Umbria, probably recorded their descent from the Traii, some of whom lived at Tuder. The emperor Trajan was descended from a branch of this family that settled in Hispania, as did some of the Traii. The surname is found with Lucius Blattius Trajanus Pollio, colleague of the duumvir Gaius Traius Pollio; his surnames seem to indicate that he was likewise descended from the Traii Polliones.[4]  Members This list includes abbreviated praenomina. For an explanation of this practice, see filiation. Traia, a woman named in a pottery inscription from Rome.[7] Gaius Traius, named in a sepulchral inscription from Italica in Hispania Baetica.[8] Marcus Traius M. f., named in an inscription from Tuder in Umbria.[9] Lucius Traius Adjutor, buried at the site of modern Pesco Sannita, formerly part of Samnium, in a tomb built by Tituleia Felicissima, his wife of twenty-five years.[3] Quintus Traius Areianus, father of the Areianus honoured at Arva in Hispania Baetica, was probably the husband of Aemilia Lucilla, and the father or stepfather of Sergius Rufinus.[5] Quintus Traius Q. f. Areianus, honoured with a sepulchre and statue at Arva, dedicated by his mother, Aemilia Lucilla, and brother, Sergius Rufinus.[5] Lucius Traius L. f. Honoratus, dedicated a tomb at Ligures Baebiani in Samnium for his mother, Quintia Phoebas.[2] Gaius Traius Logismus, together with Quartula Cantria, perhaps his wife, dedicated a tomb at Corduba in Hispania Baetica, dating from the middle part of the first century, for Faustus, probably their child, aged seven months.[10] Gaius Traius C. f. Pollio, designated one of the municipal duumvirs of Italica, along with Lucius Blattius Trajanus Pollio, probably his relative, in an Augustan-era inscription.[4] Marcus Traius Samacius Dualius, a youth buried at the site of modern Zarza de Granadilla, formerly part of Lusitania, aged fifteen.[11] See also List of Roman gentes References  Chase, p. 120.  CIL IX, 1484.  CIL IX, 1529.  AE 1978, 402.  CIL II, 1065.  Chase, p. 111.  CIL XV, 1805.  AE 2003, 910.  CIL XI, 4686.  CIL II-7, 547.  Hispania Epigraphica, 2013, 141. Bibliography Theodor Mommsen et alii, Corpus Inscriptionum Latinarum (The Body of Latin Inscriptions, abbreviated CIL), Berlin-Brandenburgische Akademie der Wissenschaften (1853–present). René Cagnat et alii, L'Année épigraphique (The Year in Epigraphy, abbreviated AE), Presses Universitaires de France (1888–present). George Davis Chase, "The Origin of Roman Praenomina", in Harvard Studies in Classical Philology, vol. VIII, pp. 103–184 (1897). Hispania Epigraphica (Epigraphy of Spain), Madrid (1989–present). Category: Roman gentes

 

Speranza, J. L. (n. d.). ‘H. P. Grice e J. L. Speranza: La Conversazione – I Verbali: Traio – Ossia: Grice e Traio – Grex griceiana – verbalia: Traio. For the Traii, I think the most Speranzian candidate is not the municipal magistrate but the wonderfully named:  Gaius Traius Logismus. [GREXv3 | Word]  The trouble, of course, is that Logismus immediately suggests Greek:  λογισμός  which can mean:  calculation, reckoning, reasoning, consideration, inference.  Now, we do not know why he bore that cognomen. The inscription merely records the name; it does not tell us whether it reflected a profession, character, or family tradition. [GREXv3 | Word] Still, the name itself is irresistible for a Gricean. A vignette:  (*) QUID AGIS? (What are you doing?) LOGISMVS. Ratiocinor. (I am reasoning.) +> Understanding an utterance requires a process of inference.  That takes us straight to Grice's favourite move:  what is said versus what is meant.   A second attractive candidate is:  Gaius Traius Pollio, one of the duumvirs of Italica. [GREXv3 | Word]  Not because of the office itself, but because of the cognomen. As your source notes, Pollio originally referred to a "polisher". [GREXv3 | Word] That suggests a delightfully Oxonian metaphor:  the philosopher does not invent concepts; he polishes them.  Almost a Roman anticipation of ordinary-language philosophy.  But there is another detail that I suspect would interest Speranza even more. The entry explicitly notes a possible relationship between the nomen Traius and the cognomen Traianus, borne by the family from which the emperor Trajan descended. The source says that Trajanus probably recorded descent from the Traii. [GREXv3 | Word] That gives us another one of your favourite themes:  how descriptions become names.  Originally:  Traianus = "connected with the Traii."  Later:  Trajan is simply the emperor's name.  The descriptive origin fades. The reference survives.  Speranza's gloss  The Traii contribute a man called Logismus. Whether or not he actually reasoned more than his neighbours, his cognomen is a standing reminder that communication is not exhausted by utterance. Between what is heard and what is understood there lies a process of reckoning, calculation, and inference. The Greeks called it logismos; Grice called it working out what the speaker meant. [GREXv3 | Word]

 

Speranza, J. L. (n. d.). ‘H. P. Grice e J. L. Speranza: La Conversazione – I Verbali: Trappani – Ossia: Grice e Trappani: la ragione conversazionale. Note sulla Dissertatio doctoralis. Il Gruppo di Gioco di H. P. Grice. Giuseppe La Napola da Trapani (Trapani) Jr.: la ragione conversazionale, Giuseppe La Napola (Napoli) da Trapani junior è stato un francescano, filosofo e teologo italiano.  Nato a Trapani, Giuseppe La Napola da Trapani jr. era un frate minore conventuale, da distinguersi da Giuseppe La Napola da Trapani senior, sempre frate minore conventuale ma suo zio. Appartenente alla Provincia di Sicilia, venne inviato a Roma, presso il Collegio San Bonaventura, da cui uscì addottorato nel 1608. In seguito ha esercitato la docenza presso lo Studium di Bologna, poi reggente degli studi a Padova, carica che esercitò per poco tempo.  Infatti, a Enna, la fraternità provinciale della Sicilia lo elesse suo Ministro, carica che il Ministro generale dei frati minori conventuali, Giacomo Montanari da Bagnocavallo, non rese effettiva se prima non avesse portato a termine il suo incarico di insegnamento. fu reggente degli studi a Palermo ed è da presupporre che egli sia stato reggente degli studi a Napoli. è tornato a Trapani, dove è rimasto fino alla fine dei suoi giorni. La tradizione lo ricorda come il maestro di Bartolomeo Mastri da Meldola.  Nel suo insegnamento, Giuseppe La Napola jr. non esponeva solamente la dottrina di una corrente teologica, ma offriva una formazione metodologica innovativa per il tempo, privilegiando la via Scoti, i principi della dottrina scotista Marco Forlivesi, "Scotistarum princeps". Bartolomeo Mastri e il suo tempo, Centro Studi Antoniani, Padova Marco Forlivesi, Scotistarum princeps. Bartolomeo Mastri e il suo tempo, Centro Studi Antoniani, Padova Marco Forlivesi, «Gli scotisti secenteschi di fronte al dibattito tra bañeziani e molinisti: un'introduzione e una nota», in: Conoscenza e contingenza nella tradizione aristotelica medievale, a cura di St. Perfetti, E.T.S., Pisa Ordine dei Frati Minori Conventuali Giovanni Duns Scoto Bartolomeo Mastri Francescanesimo   Portale Biografie   Portale Filosofia Categorie: Francescani italiani Filosofi italiani Teologi italiani Nati a Trapani Morti a Trapani.  Grice: Caro Trapani, devo confessarti che ogni volta che sento parlare di “la ragione conversazionale francescana”, mi immagino subito una tavolata di frati che discutono se sia più filosofico il pane raffermo o la zuppa calda. Dimmi: come si filosofeggia tra le mura conventuali, con un po’ di ironia?  Trapani: Ah, Grice, ti dirò che la vera difficoltà non sta nel pane o nella zuppa, ma nel convincere i frati che la logica scotista non si applica alle porzioni del pranzo! E se qualcuno osa citare Aristotele, gli facciamo portare il piatto vuoto: così impara il valore della contingenza!  Grice: Splendido! Allora, dovrei scrivere un trattato sul “principio di sufficienza della minestra”? Forse così potrei finalmente convincere Russell che la filosofia non si fa solo con numeri e formule, ma anche con cucchiai e sorrisi tra amici!  Trapani: Grice, se vuoi davvero filosofare alla siciliana, ricorda il proverbio: “Meglio una minestra condivisa che cento sillogismi da soli!” E poi, se il dibattito si fa troppo acceso, basta offrire un cannolo: quello mette tutti d’accordo, persino gli scotisti più testardi! G: la ragione conversazionale e l’implicatura conversazionle –Grice italo implicatura. Filosofo italiano.  Grice: Caro Trapaninapola, devo confessarti che ogni volta che sento parlare di implicatura conversazionale, immagino subito una riunione segreta tra filosofi dove si discute se il caffè debba essere lungo o ristretto. Dimmi, è così che funziona la filosofia italiana a Roma, o sono io che complico tutto come sempre? Trapaninapola: Ah, Grice, se la ragione conversazionale potesse davvero decidere il destino del caffè romano, avremmo risolto più problemi che in mille trattati! Ma ti dirò, l’implicatura qui si manifesta quando il barista ti chiede “zucchero?” e tu rispondi “come viene viene”—un vero esercizio di filosofia applicata! Grice: Splendido! Allora, per capire la tua implicatura, dovrei forse interpretare ogni gesto del barista come una metafora esistenziale? Mi sa che dovrò scrivere un nuovo capitolo sul “significato nascosto del cucchiaino abbandonato”, o rischiare di essere frainteso come un turista a Trastevere! Trapaninapola: Grice, non c’è dubbio che il cucchiaino abbandonato sia la vera chiave della filosofia italiana! D’altronde, come diceva mio zio – che era famoso più per il cannolo che per i sillogismi – “se non capisci la conversazione, almeno goditi il dolce!” Ecco la vera implicatura: filosofare, sì, ma sempre con il sorriso… e qualcosa di buono da mangiare! Trapani, Giuseppe La Napola da (1608). Dissertatio doctoralis. Collegio Fidanza, Roma.

 

Speranza, J. L. (n. d.). ‘H. P. Grice e J. L. Speranza: La Conversazione – I Verbali: Traulo – Ossia: Grice e Traulo – Grex griceiana: verbalia – Traulo. The gens Traula, also found as Traulia or Traullia, was an obscure plebeian family of equestrian rank at ancient Rome. Only one member of this gens seems to be mentioned by Roman writers: Sextus Traulus Montanus, whom Claudius put to death in AD 48.[1] A few others are known from inscriptions.  Origin The nomen Traulus is of Etruscan derivation,[2][3] and some of the inscriptions of this gens are from the Etruscan city of Volaterrae.[4][5]  Members This list includes abbreviated praenomina. For an explanation of this practice, see filiation. Sextus Traulus Montanus, a young eques, was seduced by the empress Messalina, who discarded him immediately thereafter. Despite the brevity of their affair, Claudius had him put to death along with Messalina's various paramours in AD 48.[6][7][8] Traulus, a potter whose work has been found in Venetia and Histria and Pannonia Superior. His maker's mark seems to identify his partner as Crispinilla,[i] and their wares have been dated to the middle portion of the first century.[10] Traullius Rufinus, one of the leaders of an ala, an allied cavalry unit serving in Pannonia Superior in AD 161.[11] Undated Trauli Traulia Fortunata, buried at Portus in Latium, along with Aquilia Marcia, in a tomb built by Atimetus Polybianus, a slave of the imperial household.[12] Sextus Traulius Hister, buried at Rome, in a tomb built by his wife, Valeria Procula.[13] Gaius Traulus C. l. Phoebus, a freedman, and one of the Seviri Augustales, was buried at Volaterrae in Etruria, aged thirty-seven, with a monument from Pergonia Prima.[4] Traulus Quadratus, dedicated a tomb at Volaterrae for his wife, Petronia Hetaera.[5] Notes  Nothing in the epigraphy indicates that this is Calvia Crispinilla, the notorious member of Nero's court, or that Traulus should be identified as Sextus Traulus Montanus, whom Claudius had put to death some time earlier; but Dessau suggested that perhaps Montanus was Crispinilla's first husband, rather than the former consul whom she married following the death of Nero.[9][3] See also List of Roman gentes References  Dictionary of Greek and Roman Biography and Mythology, vol. III, p. 1170 ("Traulus Montanus").  Schulze, Zur Geschichte lateinischer Eigennamen, 287.  PW, "Sex. Traulus Montanus".  CIL XI, 1750.  CIL XI, 1787.  Tacitus, Annales, xi. 36.  Seneca, Apocolocyntosis, 13.  PIR, vol. III, p. 332 (T, no. 223).  Tacitus, Historiae, i. 73.  CIL III, 12010,07, CIL III, 14371,07, CIL V, 8110,207.  AE 2001, 1640.  CIL XIV, 4793.  CIL VI, 28256. Bibliography Lucius Annaeus Seneca (Seneca the Younger), Apocolocyntosis Divi Claudii (The Gourdification of the Divine Claudius). Publius Cornelius Tacitus, Annales, Historiae. Dictionary of Greek and Roman Biography and Mythology, William Smith, ed., Little, Brown and Company, Boston (1849). Theodor Mommsen et alii, Corpus Inscriptionum Latinarum (The Body of Latin Inscriptions, abbreviated CIL), Berlin-Brandenburgische Akademie der Wissenschaften (1853–present). René Cagnat et alii, L'Année épigraphique (The Year in Epigraphy, abbreviated AE), Presses Universitaires de France (1888–present). August Pauly, Georg Wissowa, et alii, Realencyclopädie der Classischen Altertumswissenschaft (Scientific Encyclopedia of the Knowledge of Classical Antiquities, abbreviated RE or PW), J. B. Metzler, Stuttgart (1894–1980). Paul von Rohden, Elimar Klebs, & Hermann Dessau, Prosopographia Imperii Romani (The Prosopography of the Roman Empire, abbreviated PIR), Berlin (1898). Wilhelm Schulze, Zur Geschichte lateinischer Eigennamen (The History of Latin Proper Names), Weidmannsche Buchhandlung, Berlin (1904). Category: Roman gentes ANd from this gens? Thanks

 

Speranza, J. L. (n. d.). ‘H. P. Grice e J. L. Speranza: La Conversazione – I Verbali: Traulo – Ossia: Grice e Traulo – Grex griceiana: verbalia – Traulo. For the Trauli/Traulii, there is really one figure who dominates the dossier:  Sextus Traulus Montanus. [GREXv3 | Word]  And interestingly, he is Gricean not because of anything he said, but because of what was said about him. According to Tacitus, Messalina seduced him and then discarded him almost immediately; nevertheless, when the reckoning came in AD 48, Claudius had him executed along with Messalina's other lovers. [GREXv3 | Word] The philosophically interesting point is one of description. If we schematize:  actual relation: brief affair; public description: one of Messalina's paramours; political consequence: execution.  The question becomes:  How much follows from a description?  A Gricean would distinguish:  the underlying facts, the way they are described, the inferences drawn from the description.  One can imagine:  (*) MONTANVS. Semel vidi. (I met her once.) ACCVSATOR. Paramour es. (You are her lover.) +> A classification may carry consequences far beyond the facts that originally justified it.  That is rather close to Grice's suspicion of loose classifications and conversational overreach.  There is also a delightfully Roman irony in the cognomen:  Montanus = "of the mountains", "mountain man."  Yet the thing for which he became famous has nothing whatever to do with mountains. The descriptive origin of the name has become almost entirely detached from the bearer, which returns us to one of your recurring themes:  description becoming designation.   A second candidate is the anonymous potter:  Traulus, whose maker's marks appear on pottery. [GREXv3 | Word]  The potter's stamp is almost a primitive speech act. The object "says":  Traulus made this.  Without a sentence, there is a communicative act of attribution. Rather like a signature.  A Speranzian gloss  The Traulii contribute a man destroyed less by an act than by a description. Once Sextus Traulus Montanus had been entered into the category "Messalina's lovers," the subsequent nuances mattered little. Grice repeatedly warned that hearers draw conclusions exceeding the explicit content. Roman politics demonstrates that they sometimes do so fatally. [GREXv3 | Word]

 

Speranza, J. L. (n. d.). ‘H. P. Grice e J. L. Speranza: La Conversazione – I Verbali: Trausio – Ossia: Grice e Trausio – Grex griceiana – verbalia: Trausio -- The gens Trausia was an obscure plebeian family at ancient Rome. Few members of this gens are mentioned in Roman writers, but several are known from inscriptions.  Members This list includes abbreviated praenomina. For an explanation of this practice, see filiation. Gaius Trausius C. l. Herophilus, a freedman buried at Rome between the middle of the first century BC and the middle of the first century AD.[1] Trausius, a man whose excessive wealth was criticized by Horace in one of his Satires. Porphyrion amends his name to Travius.[2][3][4] Titus Trausius Admetus, a soldier whose name was inscribed as one of the trecenarii[i] in a pay list from Pompeii in Campania, dating from AD 56.[6] Gaius Trausius Phoebus, buried in a first- or second-century tomb at Rome.[7] Trausia Auge, a freedwoman who, along with the freedman Trausius Paris, built an early second-century tomb at Rome for their patron, Gaius Trausius Lucrio.[8] Gaius Trausius Lucrio, the patron of the freedman Trausius Paris and the freedwoman Trausia Auge, who built a tomb for him at Rome, dating from the early second century.[8] Trausius Paris, a freedman who, along with the freedwoman Trausia Auge, built an early second-century tomb at Rome for their patron, Gaius Trausius Lucrio.[8] Undated Trausii Quintus Trausius, buried at Calama in Africa Proconsularis, aged twenty-five, along with Cornelia Fortunata, aged forty, Trausius Saturninus, and Trausia Honorata.[9] Trausia C. f. Asiatice, a little girl buried at Rome, aged two years, thirty days, in a tomb built by her parents, Gaius Trausius Pudens and Caesia Veneria. She had a sister of the same name who died in infancy.[10] Trausia C. f. Asiatice, an infant buried at Rome, aged three months, eleven days, in a tomb built by her parents, Gaius Trausius Pudens and Caesia Veneria. She had a sister of the same name who died as a small child.[10] Gaius Trausius Asiaticus, the brother of Gaius Trausius Pudens, who built a family sepulchre at Rome for himself, his wife, Caesia Veneria, his daughter, Trausia Fortunata, and his brother, making an offering to the spirits of the dead for their protection.[11] Trausia C. f. Fortunata, the daughter of Gaius Trausius Pudens and Caesia Veneria, who built a family sepulchre at Rome for themselves, their daughter, and Gaius Trausius Asiaticus, Pudens' brother, making an offering to the spirits of the dead for their protection.[11] Trausia Honorata, buried at Calama, aged twenty, along with Quintus Trausius, Trausius Saturninus, and Cornelia Fortunata, aged forty.[9] Gaius Trausius Pudens, built a family sepulchre at Rome for himself, his wife, Caesia Veneria, their daughter, Trausia Fortunata, and Pudens' brother, Gaius Trausius Asiaticus, and making an offering to the spirits of the dead for their protection. Pudens and Veneria also buried three children, two daughters named Trausia Asiatice, and a son named Trausius Pudens.[11][10] Gaius Trausius C. f. Pudens, the son of Gaius Trausius Pudens and Caesia Veneria, was an infant buried at Rome, aged four months, twenty-four days.[10] Trausius Saturninus, buried at Calama, aged twenty-six, along with Quintus Trausius, Trausia Honorata, and Cornelia Fortunata, aged forty.[9] Trausius Valens, a potter whose maker's mark was found at Londinium in Britannia.[12] Notes  A trecenarius was a soldier entitled to be paid three hundred sestertii, a much higher rate than that received by ordinary soldiers.[5] See also List of Roman gentes References  CIL VI, 5635.  Horace, Satirae, ii. 2, 99.  Pomponius Porphyrion, Commentaries on Horace, "Satirae", ii. 2, 99.  PIR, vol. III, p. 332 (T, No. 224).  Lewis & Short, A Latin Dictionary, s.v. tercenarius.  CIL IV, 3440,045.  CIL VI, 27568.  CIL VI, 27570.  CIL VIII, 5465.  CIL VI, 27572.  CIL VI, 27571.  CIL VII, 1334,57. Bibliography Quintus Horatius Flaccus (Horace), Satirae (Satires). Pomponius Porphyrion, Commentarii in Q. Horatium Flaccum (Commentaries on Horace). Theodor Mommsen et alii, Corpus Inscriptionum Latinarum (The Body of Latin Inscriptions, abbreviated CIL), Berlin-Brandenburgische Akademie der Wissenschaften (1853–present). Charlton T. Lewis and Charles Short, A Latin Dictionary, Clarendon Press, Oxford (1879). Category: Roman gentes And for THIS gens? Thanks

 

Speranza, J. L. (n. d.). ‘H. P. Grice e J. L. Speranza: La Conversazione – I Verbali: Trausio – Ossia: Grice e Trausio – Grex griceiana – verbalia: Trausio – For the Trausii, I think the obvious Speranzian candidate is not the soldier or the potter but the shadowy figure in Horace:  Trausius, whose wealth is criticized in Satires 2.2.99, although the ancient commentator Porphyrion already thought the reading suspicious and proposed Travius instead. [GREXv3 | Word]  This is immediately attractive because we are no longer dealing merely with a person but with a textual problem. The question becomes:  Did Horace write Trausius? Or did he write Travius?  Before we ask what Horace meant, we must ask:  What did Horace say?  A very Gricean order of investigation.  Text before meaning Grice often insists that one should not rush to pragmatics before establishing the semantics. The Trausius/Travius problem is even more primitive:  Which word is on the page? Which person is being referred to? Only then, what is being conveyed?  So a vignette:  (*) HORATIVS. Trausius. SCHOLIASTA. Travius. PHILOSOPHVS. Prius constituamus quis sit. (First let us determine who it is.) +> Reference precedes interpretation.   Another Trausian theme: repeated names The family of Gaius Trausius Pudens is also fascinating. According to the inscriptions, he and Caesia Veneria buried two daughters both called Trausia Asiatice, one dying in infancy and the other a little later in childhood. [GREXv3 | Word] This creates a classic problem of reference:  "Trausia Asiatice died."  Which one? The name alone does not identify a unique person. Context must do the work. That is remarkably close to the issues of identification and definite reference that fascinated twentieth-century philosophers.  The best cognomen I also like:  Gaius Trausius Lucrio. [GREXv3 | Word]  Lucrio suggests profit, gain, or commercial success. One immediately thinks of Horace's criticism of excessive wealth and luxury, which rather nicely circles back to the literary Trausius. [GREXv3 | Word]  Speranzian gloss  The Trausii contribute not a statesman but a textual crux. Was Horace attacking Trausius or Travius? The problem reminds us that interpretation begins only after identification. Before asking what an utterance implies, one must first know what utterance was made. That lesson is as philological as it is Gricean. [GREXv3 | Word] Well, Grice distrusted names (proper names) and preferrred dossiers: 'the wealthy man' -- 'of the gens Trausia'? 'No, according to Pomponio, of the gens Traudi'. What else can we say about him? Well, he was stinky rich (a) if from the Trausii, honest, (b) if from the Taudi, what do we know? Thanks Quite so. A Gricean would almost certainly distrust the proper name here and ask for the dossier. The trouble is that the dossier is very thin. What we actually know from the source tradition is roughly this:  In Horace, Satires 2.2.99, a man called Trausius appears in the manuscripts as an example connected with excessive wealth. [GREXv3 | Word] The ancient commentator Porphyrion thought the reading problematic and emended the name to Travius. [GREXv3 | Word]  So if one adopts a Gricean dossier analysis: Dossier A  "the wealthy fellow criticized by Horace"  Properties:  very rich, cited satirically by Horace, perhaps associated with luxury or excess, name transmitted as Trausius in the text tradition. [GREXv3 | Word]  Dossier B  "the wealthy fellow criticized by Horace"  Properties:  exactly the same rich fellow, exactly the same satirical context, but called Travius according to Porphyrion's conjecture. [GREXv3 | Word]  The striking thing is that almost the entire dossier survives the name change. A Gricean would say:  The name is unstable. The dossier is comparatively stable.  Which is why Grice preferred definite descriptions and dossiers to the magical powers often attributed to proper names. In fact, one might put it this way:  If the manuscripts tomorrow proved decisively that the man was Travius rather than Trausius, very little of substance would change. He would still be: "that obscenely wealthy fellow Horace mocks."  The satiric role remains. The label changes. And that is almost a textbook Speranza-Grice lesson:  Reference is often carried less by a name than by a cluster of identifying facts.  As for whether the historical gens Trausia gains anything from him, we cannot really say. If Porphyrion is right, he may not have belonged to the Trausii at all. If the manuscript reading is right, then the sole additional item in the dossier is:  "a rich Trausius mocked by Horace." [GREXv3 | Word]  Which is not a bad epitaph, admittedly. But Porphyrion adds a problem. Trausia IS a gens -- Travia, do we know? Thanks Excellent point. Porphyrion's emendation creates a genuine onomastic problem, not merely a textual one. If the reading is Trausius, we can at least say:  there is a known gens Trausia, however obscure; members are attested epigraphically, and the article you quoted is based on those attestations. [GREXv3 | Word]  If the reading is Travius, the situation changes. There is also a gens Travia (or Travii), likewise obscure and mostly known from inscriptions rather than literary history. [en.wikipedia.org], [grokipedia.com] So Porphyrion was not replacing a known nomen with a non-existent one. The alternatives are roughly:                  ReadingCorresponding gensTrausiusgens TrausiaTraviusgens Travia  [GREXv3 | Word], [en.wikipedia.org] From a Gricean "dossier" perspective, this is delightful because the dossier remains largely unchanged:  "the extremely wealthy man criticized by Horace"  survives whether the label is Trausius or Travius. [GREXv3 | Word] Indeed, the proper name contributes surprisingly little. The dossier we can recover is only:  male, wealthy enough for Horatian satire, associated with luxury or excess, cited as a negative example by Horace. [GREXv3 | Word]  Once Porphyrion intervenes, the reference problem almost becomes Kripkean avant la lettre:  Was Horace talking about Trausius or Travius?  The answer may be:  We know rather more about the satirical role than about the individual.  And that is very close to Grice's preference for dossiers over names. The nomina compete; the descriptive content remains largely stable. A Speranzian gloss:  If the manuscripts say Trausius and Porphyrion says Travius, the philosopher need not panic. Both labels point toward substantially the same dossier: "that absurdly rich fellow whom Horace regarded as a useful warning." The proper name wobbles; the characterization survives. [GREXv3 | Word], [en.wikipedia.org] Well, in Griceian terms, if Orazio is written a satura intended for a reader of the Social Register (Rome's Debrett's Peerage), he KNOWS that he means TRAVSIVS -- He cannot mean TRAVIVS. On the other hand, if he is written by the same addressee he means TRAVIVS, not TRAVSIVS. But Porphyrion is just possibly just checking what the 'letters' look like reading -- unless he goes: "After years of research, I did find that there was no wealthyman named Trausio (negatives don't prove, granted) and found one wealthy man called Travius. So I suggest Orazio means Travio, not Trausio." Thanks -- what is the locus classicus loc. cit. op. cit for Porphyrion? Thanks I think your Gricean instinct is exactly right. If Horace is writing for a readership that shares a social world, then the question is not merely:  What sequence of letters appears in the manuscript?  but:  Whom would Horace's intended audience have identified?  That is much closer to Grice's notion of speaker-meaning than to mere inscriptional meaning. In modern terms:  If the poet intends his Roman reader to think of Mr. Trausius, and the reader does so, then the communicative act succeeds even if scribes later become confused. If a copyist writes Trausius where Horace wrote Travius (or vice versa), the letters survive but the intended referent may not.  So your dossier approach is stronger than a purely textual one. Porphyrion's intervention could be of two different kinds: 1. Paleographical The weakest possibility:  "The manuscripts say Trausius, but I think they should read Travius."  This is merely textual criticism. 2. Prosopographical The stronger possibility:  "Trausius makes little sense historically; Travius fits the social reality known to me."  That would be much closer to the Gricean question:  Who was Horace trying to get his reader to think about?  Unfortunately, from the references before us, I can verify only that Porphyrion comments on the passage and that he substitutes Travius for Trausius. The source material I have does not preserve the full text of Porphyrion's note or his explicit reasoning. [GREXv3 | Word] As for the locus classicus, the citation is:  Pomponius Porphyrion, Commentary on Horace, Satirae 2.2.99. [GREXv3 | Word]  Thus the standard scholarly reference would be something like:  Porphyrio ad Hor. Sat. 2.2.99.  That is the place where the emendation Travius is associated with the passage. [GREXv3 | Word] A very Gricean formulation would be:  The manuscript transmits a name; the commentator seeks a referent. The former is semantics of inscription; the latter is speaker's meaning. Horace cannot have meant "whoever happens to bear these letters"; he meant a particular wealthy fellow known, or expected to be known, to his audience. Whether that fellow was called Trausius or Travius is precisely the point at issue. [GREXv3 | Word] Does this help? Thanks In his original commentary, the ancient grammarian Pomponius Porphyrio did read and use the spelling "Travius". [1] Porphyrio's Textual Variant While modern critical editions of Horace have restored the spelling to Trausius based on historical context and other branch manuscripts, Porphyrio's actual transmission explicitly reads: [1] "Travius pauper et luxuriosus fuit." (Translation: "Travius was a poor and luxurious/extravagant man.") [1] Scholars trace this spelling directly to the scholia (ancient footnotes) of Porphyrio. Because of this, certain resources and older gens registries note that Porphyrio actively "amends" or preserves the name as Travius.[1] Why the Difference? Historically, Roman naming conventions and late antiquity/medieval handwritten copying caused major shifts: The Trausia Gens: Historically, there was an actual Trausia gens (family line) in Roman history. The Scriptor Change: Because the letters u and v were graphically identical in Latin scripts (both written as V), and phonetically shifted over time, the name was easily cemented as Travius in Porphyrio's manuscript tradition. [1, 2] So if you are reading the exact Latin text of Porphyrio's commentary, you will indeed see him refer to the bankrupt, extravagant man explicitly as Travius! [1, 2] Would you like to explore other instances where Porphyrio's text preserves a different spelling or interpretation compared to standard modern editions of Horace? L'AI può commettere errori, quindi verifica le risposte but there Also was a travia gens — what do scholars think today? 6 siti Scholars today view this problem through two lenses: epigraphy (historical records) and textual criticism(the study of manuscript mistakes). [1, 2] The general consensus among modern historians and classicists relies on a few key points: 1. Both Families Are Real (But Obscure) You are completely correct that a Travia gens existed. Epigraphic evidence (surviving stone inscriptions) proves that both names were legitimate, minor Roman family lines: [1, 2] Trausia Gens: Proven by inscriptions, but extremely rare. Travia Gens: Explicitly confirmed by Roman burial markers. For example, archeologists found an inscription for a Titus Travius buried in Umbria dating to the late first century BCE—putting him in Italy right around the exact time Horace was writing his Satires. [1, 2] 2. The Verdict on Horace's Original Choice Despite both names being historically real, modern critical editors (like those of the Oxford Classical Texts or Teubner) overwhelmingly agree that Horace himself originally wrote Trausius. [1] Scholars believe that Horace deliberately used a very rare name—Trausius—to mock an obscure, real-life spendthrift. Because the character was a decoctor ignotus (an obscure bankrupt man), his name was easily confused by later generations. [1] 3. How Porphyrio Got "Travius" Scholars explain Pomponius Porphyrio's reading of Travius as a "Lectio Facilior" (a simpler, more familiar reading) or a phonetic shift: [1, 2] In ancient Latin script, the letters U and V were written identically as V. To a scribe or commentator in the 3rd century CE (when Porphyrio lived), reading the letters TRAVSIVSlook identical to TRAVSIVS. Over time, as pronunciation shifted, the more recognizable local family name Travius naturally supplanted the nearly extinct name Trausius in his notes. [1] The Modern Scholar's Summary Today, classicists treat the presence of the Travia gens as the exact reason why Porphyrio made the error. Because the Travius name actually existed in Italy, it was an incredibly easy and natural substitute for ancient copyists to make when looking at Horace's original, obscure target, Trausius. [1] Would you like to see the archeological breakdown of where the Travia gens inscriptions were found in Italy, or look at other name puns Horace uses in his Satires? Yes, this helps, and it actually sharpens the problem in a rather Gricean way. The crucial point is that Porphyrion is not correcting Trausius to a non-name. Both alternatives exist:  Trausius belongs to a real, albeit obscure, gens Trausia. [GREXv3 | Word] Travius belongs to a real, albeit obscure, gens Travia. [en.wikipedia.org]  So the issue is not:  name versus nonsense,  but:  one real Roman name versus another real Roman name.  That makes the problem much more interesting. Porphyrion's actual testimony What is especially important in your note is the reported Porphyrion comment:  Travius pauper et luxuriosus fuit.  If that is indeed the wording of the scholion, Porphyrion is not merely transmitting letters. He is supplying a dossier. Not:  "The manuscripts read Travius."  But:  "Travius was a poor and luxurious (extravagant) man."  That sounds less like a paleographical note and more like a piece of antiquarian identification. The moment he says:  pauper et luxuriosus  he is no longer discussing orthography. He is discussing a person.  The Gricean question Your formulation is exactly the right one: Suppose Horace wrote for readers who moved in Roman elite circles. Then the relevant question is not:  What letters stood in his autograph?  But:  Which dossier did Horace intend his audience to retrieve?  That is much closer to Grice's:  What did the speaker mean?  than to:  What sentence-type was produced?  If Horace expected his audience to think immediately:  "Ah yes, that ridiculous spendthrift Trausius,"  then Porphyrion is wrong, however elegant his emendation. If Horace expected:  "Ah yes, Travius, the bankrupt dandy,"  then Porphyrion may be preserving authentic information lost to us.  Modern scholars What you've quoted reflects what seems to be the current tendency:  Both names are historically possible. The manuscript tradition points to Trausius. Porphyrion offers Travius. Modern editors generally retain Trausius. [GREXv3 | Word], [en.wikipedia.org]  But notice the irony. The modern editor is often more interested in:  What did Horace write?  whereas a Gricean might ask:  Whom did Horace mean?  Those questions coincide only if we can identify the referent.  A very Speranzian gloss The situation resembles a miniature version of Russell versus Grice. The editor says:  Determine the correct expression.  The Gricean says:  Determine the intended dossier.  Thus:  Trausius and Travius may compete as names, while the dossier remains surprisingly stable: "the notoriously extravagant man whom Horace expects his readers to recognize."  The letters may wobble. The social target remains. And if Porphyrion really knew an identifiable Travius pauper et luxuriosus, then his evidence is not merely textual. It becomes a rival theory of whom Horace intended to pick out. That is a much deeper dispute than whether one reads VS or VI in a manuscript.

 

Speranza, J. L. (n. d.). ‘H. P. Grice e J. L. Speranza: La Conversazione – I Verbali: Travio – Ossia: Grice e Travio – Grex griceiana – verbalia: Travio -- The gens Travia was an obscure plebeian family at ancient Rome. Few members of this gens are mentioned by Roman writers, but a number are known from inscriptions.  Praenomina The main praenomina of the Travii were Titus and Marcus, among the most common names at all periods of Roman history. A few members of this gens bore other common names, including Gaius, Lucius, Publius, and Quintus.  Members This list includes abbreviated praenomina. For an explanation of this practice, see filiation. Titus Travius, buried at Ameria in Umbria in the latter half of the first century BC.[1] Travius, the name by which Pomponius Porphyrion describes a man whose excessive wealth was criticized by Horace in one of his Satires. Horace calls the man Trausius, an equally obscure nomen.[2][3][4] Marcus Travius, named in a sepulchral inscription from Aquincum in Pannonia Inferior, dating from the late first century.[5] Travius, a soldier in the Legio V,[i] buried in a first- or second-century tomb at Ameria.[6] Travia Prima, buried in a first- or second-century tomb at Pisaurum in Umbria, along with Marcus Attius Repens, a local official, and Titus Marius Capito.[7] Undated Travii Gaius Travius Ɔ. l., a freedman buried at Pola in Venetia and Histria.[8] Marcus Travius L. f. Saufeius Sabinus, buried at Rome.[9] Marcus Travius M. f. Saufeius Sabinus, named in an inscription from Verona in Venetia and Histria.[10] Titus Travius T. l. Acutus, a freedman, was an aurifex, or goldsmith, according to an inscription from Ameria, along with the freedman Titus Travius Argentillus.[11] Titus Travius T. l. Argentillus, a freedman, was an aurifex, according to an inscription from Ameria, along with the freedman Titus Travius Acutus. He was also an octovir, in this case perhaps a member of the town council at Ameria.[11] Titus Travius Felix, a brickmaker whose wares have been found at various sites throughout Italy.[12] Titus Travius Fortunatus, a potter whose maker's mark was found at Rome and Ostia in Latium.[13][14] Travia P. f. Secci, buried at Brixia in Venetia and Histria, along with Lucius Popillius Senex.[15] Travia Q. f. Tertia, buried at Aquinum in Latium.[16] Marcus Travius Thallus, built a tomb at Verona for himself and Livia Psyche.[17] Notes  It's unclear from the inscription whether the Legio V Macedonica or the Legio V Alaudae is meant. See also List of Roman gentes References  AE 1996, 608.  Horace, Satirae, ii. 2, 99.  Pomponius Porphyrion, Commentaries on Horace, "Satirae", ii. 2, 99.  PIR, vol. III, p. 332 (T, No. 224).  CIL III, 14349,04.  CIL XI, 4374.  CIL XI, 6359.  Pais, Supplementa Italica, 17.  CIL VI, 27567.  CIL V, 3779.  CIL XI, 4402.  CIL X, 8043,013, CIL XV, 235,10, CIL XV, 235,13, CIL XV, 235,19, CIL XV, 338,11, CIL XV, 383,09, CIL XV, 383,13, CIL XV, 383,14.  CIL XV, 297a, CIL XV, 297b.  Scavi di Ostia, xi. D, 186.  CIL V, 4679.  CIL X, 5527.  CIL V, 3780. Bibliography Quintus Horatius Flaccus (Horace), Satirae (Satires). Pomponius Porphyrion, Commentarii in Q. Horatium Flaccum (Commentaries on Horace). Theodor Mommsen et alii, Corpus Inscriptionum Latinarum (The Body of Latin Inscriptions, abbreviated CIL), Berlin-Brandenburgische Akademie der Wissenschaften (1853–present). Ettore Pais, Corporis Inscriptionum Latinarum Supplementa Italica (Italian Supplement to the Corpus Inscriptionum Latinarum), Rome (1884). René Cagnat et alii, L'Année épigraphique (The Year in Epigraphy, abbreviated AE), Presses Universitaires de France (1888–present). Paul von Rohden, Elimar Klebs, & Hermann Dessau, Prosopographia Imperii Romani (The Prosopography of the Roman Empire, abbreviated PIR), Berlin (1898). Scavi di Ostia, 1953–present. Category: Roman gentes And what would be your first-best choice for a Grice-Speranza vignette from THIS gens? Thanks

 

Speranza, J. L. (n. d.). ‘H. P. Grice e J. L. Speranza: La Conversazione – I Verbali: Travio – Ossia: Grice e Travio – Grex griceiana – verbalia: Travio – For the Travii, I think there is a clear winner, and it is precisely because of the discussion we've just had. My first choice would be:  Travius, the wealthy man in Horace's Satires as transmitted by Porphyrion, whether or not Horace originally wrote Trausius. [GREXv3 | Word]  Not because he is historically important, but because he gives us a perfect Grice-Speranza vignette about reference. Why this one? We know almost nothing securely about the individual. The dossier is roughly:  wealthy, satirized by Horace, remembered for luxury or extravagance, called Trausius in Horace's text, called Travius by Porphyrion. [GREXv3 | Word]  That creates a lovely puzzle:  What is Horace referring to?  The name varies. The dossier remains. A Gricean dialogue almost writes itself:  (*) HORATIVS. Trausius. PORPHYRIO. Travius. LECTOR. Quem dicitis? (Whom do you mean?) HORATIVS ET PORPHYRIO. Divitem illum luxuriosum. (That rich extravagant fellow.) +> Successful reference may survive instability in the proper name.  That is pure dossier-theory.  Why not the goldsmiths? A respectable second choice would be:  Titus Travius Acutus and Titus Travius Argentillus, both aurifices (goldsmiths). [GREXv3 | Word]  There is a nice philosophical joke there. Goldsmiths refine metal. Grice refines concepts. One could imagine:  (*) QUID FACIS? (What do you do?) AVRIFEX. Aurum purgo. (I purify gold.) PHILOSOPHVS. Notiones purgo. (I purify concepts.)  But that is admittedly a bit forced.  Why not the brickmaker? One might also nominate:  Titus Travius Felix, the brickmaker whose products circulated widely. [GREXv3 | Word]  His stamps communicate:  "Made by Felix."  A minimal act of attribution. Interesting, but less philosophically rich than the Trausius/Travius puzzle.  Speranza's gloss  The Travii contribute a man whose very name is disputed. Horace seems to call him Trausius; Porphyrion calls him Travius. Yet the satirical target remains substantially the same. The proper name wavers, the dossier persists. Grice would have observed that what the poet intended his readers to identify mattered more than the exact sequence of letters by which that identification was achieved. [GREXv3 | Word]  And, given your own interests, I suspect this is one of those rare Roman gentes where the textual problem itself is more interesting than any individual member. The hero of the gens is almost not Travius or Trausius, but the question:  Who did Horace mean?

 

Speranza, J. L. (n. d.). ‘H. P. Grice e J. L. Speranza: La Conversazione – I Verbali: Trepassi – Ossia: Grice e Trapassi: la ragione conversazionale romana, la ragione conversazionale italiana. Note sulle Rime. Il Gruppo di Gioco di H. P. Grice. Pietro Antonio Domenico Trapassi (Roma): la ragione conversazionale romana, la ragione conversazionale italiana. Grice’s theory of reason-governed conversational meaning makes implicature a rationally reconstructible upshot of cooperative talk: hearers infer what a speaker means beyond what is said by assuming the speaker is pursuing recognizable conversational ends, and they justify the inference by appeal to broadly shared norms of reasonable contribution (relevance, sufficiency, etc.). With Trapassi (Pietro Metastasio), the “reason” at issue is less the inferential logic of everyday exchange and more a dramatized public reason: his opera seria libretti stage characters whose utterances are constrained by decorum, courtly hierarchy, and the ethical politics of passion-control, so that indirectness functions as a rhetorical technology for governing emotions and securing legitimacy (what must be meant often cannot be said outright, given role, rank, and the demands of virtu and duty). In Grice, implicature is a general mechanism for extracting intended meaning from conversational moves; in Metastasio/Trapassi, implicit meaning is typically the scenic and moral surplus generated when the literal line is shaped for performance—an economy of allusion, restraint, and audience uptake in which what is “understood” depends on shared cultural scripts about honor, clemency, sovereignty, and self-mastery. The comparison, then, is between Grice’s universalist account of reason as the interpreter’s method for computing speaker-meaning, and Trapassi’s theatrical-civic account of reason as the staged regulation of what can be said (and so of what must be implied) in a Roman/Italian idiom where language is already a public instrument of moral and political order. Grice: “There are several historical one-volume editions of Pietro Metastasio’s complete works in Italian. The most notable historical one-volume editions include: Edition Published in Florence by Tipografia Borghi e Compagni, this volume (Tutte le opere di Pietro Metastasio volume unico) contains approximately 1,097 pages. Edition Published by Le Monnier in Florence, this edition also collects his entire output into a single volume. Edition Published in Naples by C. Boutteaux e M. Aubry, this edition contains 1,119 pages with text presented in two columns.  Key Modern Edition While these historical single volumes exist, the standard scholarly reference for his complete works is actually a five-volume set edited by Bruno Brunelli, titled Tutte le opere di Pietro Metastasio, published by Mondadori. This set is widely considered the definitive modern compilation due to its critical apparatus.  Would you like to search for a current digital versionor a reprint of the 19th-century single-volume editions?Pietro Metastasio's real name was  Pietro Antonio Domenico Trapassi, and he was born in   Rome . His oeuvre is important to the history of philosophy because his dramatic works were an artistic reflection of Enlightenment-era political and moral philosophy, particularly concerning absolutist monarchy and the control of human passions through reason.    Real Name and Place of Birth Real Name: Pietro Antonio Domenico Trapassi. The name "Metastasio" was a Greek translation ("crossing") of his original surname suggested by his patron, the influential lawyer and man of letters Gianvincenzo Gravina. Place of Birth: Rome, Papal States (now Italy).  Importance in the History of Philosophy Metastasio's significance in the history of philosophy lies not in his being a philosopher himself, but in how his widely popular opera seria libretti dramatized the prevailing philosophical and political ideas of the European Ancien Régime and the early Enlightenment. Grice: Buongiorno, Trapassi! Sai, a Oxford ti conoscono come Metastasio, solo così—il vulgo si è affezionato al soprannome che ti sei dato da solo! Trapassi: Caro Grice, che curiosa sorte! Quel nome greco mi fu suggerito da Gravina, ma ormai è diventato la mia seconda pelle, tanto che quasi dimentico il mio vero Trapassi romano. Grice: Eh sì, ma forse è proprio questa metamorfosi che rende immortali gli uomini di lettere. In fondo, il nome scelto riflette la ragione conversazionale: passare, attraversare idee e mondi. Trapassi: Hai ragione, amico mio. E se il pubblico si affeziona al soprannome, è perché nei versi e nelle conversazioni trova un ponte tra la ragione italiana e quella universale. D’altronde, come dice il proverbio, “nome nuovo, vita nuova” Trapassi, Pietro Antonio Domenico (1729). Rime, Venezia: Zatta.

 

Speranza, J. L. (n. d.). ‘H. P. Grice e J. L. Speranza: La Conversazione – I Verbali: Trapè – Ossia: Grice e Trapè: la ragione conversazionale e l’implicatura conversazionale dell’umanità di Varrone. Note su Agostino uomo. Il Gruppo di Gioco di H. P. Grice. Agostino Trapè (Montegiorgio, Fermo, Marche): la ragione conversazionale e l’implicatura conversazionale dell’umanità di Varrone -- Grice’s theory of reason-governed meaning explains how hearers recover what a speaker means (including implicatures) by assuming cooperative rational agency and then reconstructing the reasons that make an utterance an appropriate move in context; the “governance” is primarily inferential and normative (what it would be reasonable to take the speaker to intend, given shared purposes and conversational constraints). Trapè, as a major Augustinian scholar and institutional founder (he promoted the Pontificio Istituto Patristico Augustinianum, founded and directed the Nuova Biblioteca Agostiniana, and the Corpus Scriptorum Augustinianorum), approaches meaning less through a maxims-and-calculation model and more through a humanitas frame in which language is a moral-intellectual practice formed by the tradition of Latinity and the education of the human person; his explicit interest in Varro and Augustine as “praecipui humanitatis cultores” signals that what matters is how discourse cultivates the human (homo) through learned conversation, textual inheritance, and spiritual-intellectual formation. In that light, Grice’s implicature looks like a micro-theory of rational coordination between interlocutors, whereas Trapè’s “conversational reason” (as your passage stages it via Varro’s humanitas) looks like the larger civilizing and ethical horizon in which conversation becomes a vehicle of formation: not only what is inferred beyond what is said, but how the very practice of speaking, joking, correcting, and learning together is ordered toward making persons more fully human. Grice supplies a general mechanism for deriving implied content from utterances; Trapè supplies a thicker account of why such mechanisms matter, because conversation—grounded in Latinity, tradition, and the Augustinian concern for the human person—functions as a school of humanitas in which reason is exercised as a lived virtue rather than merely deployed as an interpretive algorithm.-- Grice italo humanitas, homo, Varrone. Uno dei massimi studiosi della filosofia semiotica d’Agostino. Si laurea a Roma con una “Il concorso divino in Colonna” (Tolentino). Insegna a Roma. Promosse la fondazione dell'Istituto patristico augustinianum.  Fonda la "Biblioteca agostiniana" che si occupa della volgarizzazione di Agostino (Città Nuova) e il "Corpus scriptorum augustianorum", che pubblica le opere dei filosofi scolastici agostiniani.  Altri saggi: “Introduzione ad Agostino e le grandi correnti della filosofia contemporanea”, Atti del congresso Italiano di filosofia agostiniana, Roma, Tolentino; Varro et Augustinus praecipui humanitatis cultores, Latinitas Augustinus et Varro, Atti del Congresso di studi varroniani, Rieti) – VARRONE --; “Escatologia e anti-platonismo” Augustinianum, “Agostino, filosofo e teologo dell'uomo”; Bollettino dell’Istituto di filosofia (Macerata); Agostino: L'ineffabilità di Dio, in  «La ricerca di Dio nelle religioni (EMI, Bologna); “La Aeterni Patris e la filosofia”, Atti del Congresso Tomistico, Roma; Agostino, l'uomo, il pastore, il mistico” (Roma, Città Nuova); Patrologia, Casale Monferrato, Dizionario patristico e di antichità cristiana, Casale Monferrato, Introduzione e commento alla lettera apostolica «Hipponensem episcopum», Roma, Introduzione ad Agostino, Roma,  L'amico, il maestro, il pioniere, Cremona, apostolo della cultura. la semiotica d’Agostino, Varrone, humanitas.  Grice: Ah, Trapè, che piacere! Finalmente posso celebrare la “umanità” di Varrone senza dovermi arrovellare con i miei studenti barbari di Vadum Boum, che pensano che “humanitas” sia una specie di pasta integrale. Qui almeno posso festeggiare un po’ di vero spirito latino! Dimmelo, cos’è per te questa “umanità”? Non dirmi che anche tu la confondi con la mensa universitaria! Trapè: Grice, ti rassicuro: nessuna mensa universitaria, ma piuttosto un banchetto per l’anima! “Humanitas”, secondo Varrone, è quell’arte raffinata di essere uomini senza diventare statue di marmo, e senza, per carità, ridursi a semplici “homo sapiens” col grembiule. È la capacità di sorridere, discutere e magari, ogni tanto, sbagliare in bella compagnia. Varrone avrebbe davvero apprezzato il tuo spirito oxoniense, purché non troppo barbuto! Grice: Barbuto sì, ma almeno non peloso come certi miei colleghi! E allora, Trapè, se “humanitas” è allegria, conversazione, e qualche errore ben piazzato, forse dovremmo istituire una cattedra su come equivocare con stile. D’altronde, l’implicatura conversazionale non sta proprio nel trovare il senso dove gli altri cercano la regola? Varrone sarebbe il primo a ridere sotto i baffi! Trapè: Ecco, Grice, hai colto nel segno! La vera “umanità” non sta nel non sbagliare, ma nel saperci ridere sopra e imparare qualcosa, magari davanti a un piatto di lasagne — rigorosamente marchigiane, si capisce! E se i tuoi barbari studenti si lamentano, ricordagli che secondo Varrone, essere umani è saper conversare, anche quando si parla con la bocca piena. La filosofia, insomma, è più saporita se gustata in buona compagnia! Trapè, Agostino (1951). Sant'Agostino uomo, Roma: Città Nuova.