Search engine for discovering works of Art, research articles, and books related to Art and Culture
ShareThis
Javascript must be enabled to continue!

Naruszewiczowy przekład dzieł Tacyta

View through CrossRef
In 1772-1773 Adam Naruszewicz, one of most outstanding representatives of Polish Enlightenment, wrote the first complete translation of all Tacit’s works. The study is devoted to Naruszewicz’s translation work on the texts of Roman historian. Adam Naruszewicz translated them onto Polish and published them in three volume, entitled „All works of Kaj Kornelius Tacit. Translation of Adam Stanisław Naruszewicz S.J.”. The study presents a translation workshop of the bishop’s of Smoleńsk, with a special consideration of the description of the mechanisms governing the preparation of scientific commentaries. Previous research concerning the bishop’s commentary work did not at all raise the issue of authorship, claiming that the commentaries were written by Naruszewicz. The Smoleńsk bishop’s commentary work was assessed very highly by the critics. However, the outcome in comparative research of Naruszewicz’s translation and the bases of translations presented in this study allowed to formulate new statements according to which scientofic commentaries in Tacit’s first Polish translation betray a far-reaching, multidimensional dependence on the source of translation, which allows to set and prove the thesis that the bishop was their author.
Cardinal Stefan Wyszynski University in Warsaw
Title: Naruszewiczowy przekład dzieł Tacyta
Description:
In 1772-1773 Adam Naruszewicz, one of most outstanding representatives of Polish Enlightenment, wrote the first complete translation of all Tacit’s works.
The study is devoted to Naruszewicz’s translation work on the texts of Roman historian.
Adam Naruszewicz translated them onto Polish and published them in three volume, entitled „All works of Kaj Kornelius Tacit.
Translation of Adam Stanisław Naruszewicz S.
J.
”.
The study presents a translation workshop of the bishop’s of Smoleńsk, with a special consideration of the description of the mechanisms governing the preparation of scientific commentaries.
Previous research concerning the bishop’s commentary work did not at all raise the issue of authorship, claiming that the commentaries were written by Naruszewicz.
The Smoleńsk bishop’s commentary work was assessed very highly by the critics.
However, the outcome in comparative research of Naruszewicz’s translation and the bases of translations presented in this study allowed to formulate new statements according to which scientofic commentaries in Tacit’s first Polish translation betray a far-reaching, multidimensional dependence on the source of translation, which allows to set and prove the thesis that the bishop was their author.

Related Results

Donald Davidson
Donald Davidson
Poniższy tekst stanowi przekład hasła „Donald Davidson” zamieszczonego w Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, którego autorem jest profesor Jeff Malpas. Oryginałem, który posłużył ...
Prawo własności intelektualnej w fizjoterapii
Prawo własności intelektualnej w fizjoterapii
Prawo własności intelektualnej dotyczy wielu sfer codziennej działalności. W wielu momentach sięgamy po czyjeś wynalazki, a czasami sami stajemy się autorem dzieł literackich, foto...
Z dziejów kodykologii w Polsce. Dziewiętnastowieczne badania nad rękopisami „Roczników” Jana Długosza
Z dziejów kodykologii w Polsce. Dziewiętnastowieczne badania nad rękopisami „Roczników” Jana Długosza
Artykuł omawia historię polskiej kodykologii w kontekście prowadzonych w XIX w. badań nad pracami Jana Długosza, przede wszystkim jego konikami Królestwa Polskiego (Rocznikami). Au...
Cuda św. Menasa według rękopisu Pierpont Morgan 590
Cuda św. Menasa według rękopisu Pierpont Morgan 590
Artykuł zawiera przekład i wprowadzenie do najstarszego zachowanego rękopisu cudów św. Menasa. Kolekcja liczy oryginalnie 17 cudów, ale ze względu na zły stan zachowania rękopisu n...

Back to Top