Go home!



NOTE: This is a fan page.
Dr. Leithart does not have a Facebook account.

RECENT ENTRIES
-Structure of Song 3:6-11
-Sacrifice of Solomon
-Manifest Domesticity
-Elizabethan Plagiarism
-Barbie
-Ancient surgery
-Structure in Song of Songs 3
-Against Christianity
-Lion to Lamb
-Black and beautiful
-Between Memory and Desire
-Blood and smoke
-Ovine throne
-Slain Lamb Standing
-Starting over
-Judge, Lawgiver, King
-Structure in Isaiah 33
-Treasures of wisdom
-What’s Owed?
-What’s Wrong with Kitsch
CATEGORY ARCHIVES
  • LINKS
    - Biblical Horizons
    - Covenant Worldview Institute
    - Theologia
    FEED

    CONTACT

    Comments:
    leithart@leithart.com

    Problems:
    webmaster@leithart.com





    |
    |

    Hermeneutics: How we say what we say

    [Print] | [PDF] | [Email]

    Thomas writes that “to signify something by words or merely by the construction of images . . . yields nothing but the literal sense” and “poetic images refer to something other than themselves only so as to signify them; and so a signification of that sort goes no way beyond the manner in which the literal sense signifies.”

    If I understand this, I’m not convinced.  First, because this seems to conflate meaning with signification, which I take to be equivalent to reference.  They aren’t the same.  Second, because how we say what we say is as important as the reference of what we say.  I can refer to the same person as a “man” and as a “dirty rat”; they are both literally signifying the same person, but the way they signify inflects the reference.  ”Dirty rat” is not just a pointer, but an implicit metaphor that attributes some sort of “ratness” to the dirty rat in question.

    posted by Peter J. Leithart on Tuesday, October 13, 2009 at 2:25 pm