Go home!


Go register!
RECENT ENTRIES
-Apocalyptic’s return
-Prophecy and miracles
-Pharisees and tombs
-New Tomb
-Aristotle’s Wonder
-Mary
-Ministering to Jesus
-Theoria
-Mary the Tower
-Women from Galilee
-Replacing Peter
-Wonder
-Desire and knowledge
-Learning to Read
-Song of Israel
-Need for allegory
-Turn from allegory
-Cartesian pathologies
-Embodiment and Being
-Imputed responsibility
CATEGORY ARCHIVES
  • LINKS
    - Biblical Horizons
    - Covenant Worldview Institute
    - Theologia
    FEED

    CONTACT

    Comments:
    leithart@leithart.com

    Problems:
    webmaster@leithart.com





    « Previous Post | Next Post »
    « Previous post in category | Next post in category »

    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