Summa Super Priscianum (2 Bd.e) (STUDIES AND TEXTS 113). Edited by Leo Reilly.

Aus der Bibliothek von Prof. Wolfgang Haase, langj�igem Herausgeber der ANRW und des International Journal of the Classical Tradition (IJCT) / From the library of Prof. Wolfgang Haase, long-time editor of ANRW and the International Journal of the Classical Tradition (IJCT). - leicht besto�n, ansonsten tadelloser Zustand - Introduction -- Modem interest in Peter Helias and his Priscian commentary, the Summa super Priscianum, begins with the citations and discussion ofThurot (1869: 17 if.), using the Paris manuscripts, Arsenal, 711, bn, lat. 15121 and bn, lat. 16220. Thurot�s volume also contained in an appendix (1869: 508) an important biographical notice concerning Peter Helias, that of a Victorine chronicler (ms Paris, bn, lat. 15009 [olim Saint Victor, 567], f. 77), found by L�old Delisle, in which Peter is described as a native of Poitiers, dean, perhaps of the diocese, and a great philosopher in the profane sciences: -- Fuit etiam in pictavensi ecclesia decanus magister Petrus Helias in scientia litterarum secularium magnus philosophus. -- The next significant event in his modem rediscovery was the proposal by Grabmann (1926: 3: 115) that he was the inventor of Sprachlogik or speculative grammar, the first to bring logical considerations to bear on grammar. This opinion was echoed by Par�1933: 204). In 1943, however, Hunt (1943: 215-216; 1980: 22-23) discounted this view in his now classic statement that: -- The view that the infiltration of dialectic into grammar dates from the middle of the twelfth century under the influence of Petrus Helias is due to ignorance of the work of his predecessors. The reverse is true. -- This basic judgment remains unchallenged (Bursill-Hall 1975: 204-205). Hunt (1943; 1948; 1950a; 1980) also contributed fundamental work in relating Peter Helias to his sources and to his successors. De Rijk (1962; 1967a; 1967b) in his monumental but diffuse L�a modernorum makes frequent reference to and quotations from Peter Helias and other writers in tracing the history of supposition theory, the theory of the meaning or construction to be placed on a term in its context. In several excellent articles (1973; 1977; 1981), Fredborg has examined Peter Helias� doctrinal positions and traced his relationship especially to William of Conches. Kneepkens (1977; 1978; 1981) has also made an important and lasting contribution in a series of articles on particular grammatical topics in which he documents Peter Helias� role in the development. Two recent writings are those of Covington (1982), who reviews and enlarges our knowledge of medieval syntax, and King (1982), whose treatment of universals in Peter Abelard leads him to consider the history of speculation about language in general. -- What is still needed in my opinion is a greater emphasis on the primacy of the broadly literary and evocative sense of terms as contrasted with their precise and restricted logical meanings. The logical mode of description presupposes and depends on the more rough and ready literary modes. In Bolinger�s words (1968: 17), �The digital island floats on an analogue sea.� What is needed, then, in order to advance our understanding of the text, is a reemphasis on Peter Helias� own program of separating logic from grammar for as one of the Firths (probably J.R.) somewhere puts it: -- Logic has given us bad grammar and taken the heart out of language.

Lingue: la