De grammatico
- Language:
- Latin
- Status:
- Complete work
- Authorship:
- Written by the author
- Condition of the text:
- No scanning noise detected (automatic measure over the whole text, not checked by hand)
- Extent:
- ~7,580 words · 36 passages
Cite this work
- APAAnselm of Canterbury. (n.d.). De grammatico. Digital reproduction: SigPhi. https://sigphiai.com/en/works/anselm-of-canterbury/de-grammatico
- MLAAnselm of Canterbury. De grammatico. Digital reproduction, SigPhi, https://sigphiai.com/en/works/anselm-of-canterbury/de-grammatico.
- ChicagoAnselm of Canterbury. De grammatico. Digital reproduction, SigPhi. https://sigphiai.com/en/works/anselm-of-canterbury/de-grammatico.
Reference to the edition that SigPhi reproduces: SigPhi is its digital reproduction, not its publisher. The edition's year is not in the metadata (hence "n.d."), and the translator appears only when recorded.
What it is about
An exercise in logic: does 'grammarian' name a substance or a quality?
Context and history
It looks like a trifle and is not. It is one of the texts that best shows how logic was done in the eleventh century, and the problem of denominative terms it raises occupied medieval logicians for two hundred years. It reads as what it is: a training exercise.
Editorial context, not a citable source: unlike the passages of the work itself, these statements cannot be checked against the corpus.
potest intelligi grammaticus sine grammatica, et homo potest intelligi homo sine grammatica: ita hic est intelligendum quia homo non potest intelligi homo sine rationalitate, et lapis potest intelligi lapis sine rationalitate; et idcirco cum huius syllogismi sit rata conclusio, quia nullo modo lapis est homo: uideris mihi syllogismi mei, qui omnino similis est isti, conclusionem callidis tuis expositionibus obruisse. Unde iam intelligo quid dixeris quia bene intellexi sed non bene consideraui. Bene enim intellexi quid loquendo mihi significares sed idipsum quod significabas non bene consideraui, quia quomodo me deciperet ignoraui. MAGISTER. Immo in hoc non bene considerasti, quia quomodo te non deciperet ignorasti. DISCIPULUS. Quomodo? MAGISTER. Quippe si iste syllogismus quem modo proposui sic exponatur quemadmodum exposui tuum, ut dicatur: nullus homo potest intelligi homo sine rationalitate, omnis autem lapis potest intelligi lapis sine rationalitate: non habebit aliam uim concludendi, quam dixi tuum habere. Sed quondam iste quodam alio modo potest intelligi quo ille tuus non potest: habet hanc conclusionem, ut nullo modo lapis homo esse possit. Cum enim dico quia nullus homo intelligi ualet sine rationalitate, et omnis lapis ualet intelligi sine rationalitate: sic potest immo debet accipi ac si dicatur: Nullus homo potest aliquo modo intelligi sine rationalitate. Omnis uero lapis quolibet modo potest intelligi sine rationalitate. Unde conficitur: nullus /152/ igitur lapis aliquo modo est homo. In tuis uero propositionibus ueritas nequaquam similem admittit subauditionem. Namque non potest dici quia nullus grammaticus intelligi ualet aliquo modo sine grammatica, aut omnis homo ualet quolibet modo intelligi sine grammatica. Nam et omnis qui grammaticus est, potest intelligi homo sine grammatica, et nullus homo potest intelligi grammaticus sine grammatica. Quapropter non possunt conficere grammaticum nequaquam esse hominem.…
Ask about this workWhat is De grammatico about?Summarize De grammatico brieflyWhat are the key ideas in De grammatico?
← Back to Anselm of Canterbury