Koichi NAKAMuRAIntroduction When we read the two versions of/lpT, we feel that the Latin’s...
Transcript of Koichi NAKAMuRAIntroduction When we read the two versions of/lpT, we feel that the Latin’s...
盟EJOUR凡4L OFHUMAハflTIESレ10L.3ル伍Z/1 ㎜レ「ERSITY 1997
Rhetorical Analysis of Historia/lpollonii
Regi5・Tyri and Old English
・4po〃onius of Tyre
Koichi NAKAMuRA
3
Rhetorical Analysis of Historia Aρollonii
Regis Tyri and Old English
・41フo〃onius oゾTyre
Koichi NAKAMuRA
Introduction
When we read the two versions of/lpT, we feel that the Latin’s brevity
with its compact style is all the more conspicuous because of the loose,
verbose style of the Old English. This is already co面rmed by Ogawa
(1991)in terms of syntactic features such as participles, parataxis, fre-
quency of subordinate clauses which are closely related to the style in Old
English.4pT. With this steadfast, syntax-oriented information in mind,
we will make a rhetorical analysis of the two versions, which might shed
further light on the characteristics of the work. When G.in Goolden
(1958)is substantially different from RI and/or R2 in Riese(1893), and
the difference is relevant to the Old English translation, RI and/or R2 will
be cited in parenthesis, or discussed in full if it needs be。
1. Analysis of Figures
1.O Rhetorical Correspondence/Non-Correspondence
There are some, if not many, examples where rhetorical effects of the
original seem to be reflected in the translation and in certain cases, they
are definitely so.
Koichi NAKAMuRA is Lecturer of English Language in the Faculty of Political
Science and Economics, MeijiUniversity. His articles include“Notes on Redupli-
cated Perfect in Latin and Gothic”and“‘Word’and‘Speech’in Indo-Europe-an,’ hin Japanese].
3
4 Koichi NAKAMuRA
1.1Alliteration, with which no other Indo-European language has
greater a缶nity, is the stylistic feature most frequently found in Old Eng-
lish ApT.(1)There are two types, the one whose Latin original is also
alliterative, and the independent one with no Latin equivalent. The one in
34.1-2belongs to the former:
videns rex faciem eius roseo rubore perfusam
R2 roseo rubore)....
iRl roseo colore,
Da geseah se cyngcレaet Apolloniusoferbrεeded,....
mid rosan rude wees eal
The alliteration would not be lost, if reod rather than rudu had been used.
Rose is a borrowing and not a Germanic word, so this is not a case of
pure alliteration compared, for example, with 34.16:
Puella vero prostravit se pedibus patris sui
pedes patris sui)....
iRI prostrauit se ad
Da maedenレa feol to hyre fεeder fotum,...。
There are no unmarked alternatives for pes and pater, but for prosterno,
we find several words. Beseon, for instance, is employed in 18.4:
subito animadvertit quendam piscatorem granago sordido circum-
datum. Prostravit se illi ad pedes profusis lacrime ait....
レafaeringa geseah he sumne且scere gan, to pam he beseah andレus
sarlice CWεe6....
Beseon is quite far from the sense of eagerness proster〃o implies here(cf.
6.26〃°α’ovz〃tu resp’c’ens eu〃z;Beseahδα〃諺’dか〃cu〃1 andwl〃α〃’o hi〃1).
The translator obviously could not imagine the scene of the prince,
however difncult the situation might be, prostrating himself to a fisher-
man:that was not conceivable in the・Anglo-Saxon society.(On the other
hand, though we have no examples ofκαγαβdλλω,πgoσπi7vcD, or
πQoσπtπ7ωin Homer, in Greek tragedies, we dσnot lack the scenes of
people of high rank prostrating themselves(2)and the deputies of the
Helvetii, a Celtic tribe, did the same thing asking for reconciliation with
Rome(3)). Both R l and R2 useprosterno:、Etρrosternen∬θ’〃ius ad pedes;
Co9θ配θnece∬’tate prostrauit se〃〃ad、ρedes....R2 intriguingly gives
an excuse for this unprincely act of Apollonius by the phrase cogente
4
Rhetorical Analysis of Historia/Apo〃onii Regis 7ンri and Old English/lpo〃onius of Tyre 5
nece∬itate. This shows that the act of Apollonius was something also un-
usual for the Greco-Roman standard(but Iess so than for the Anglo-
Saxons)and it was forced by his desperate need, while the Old English
translator simply cut off such peripheral aspects and softened the originaI
expression unfamiliar or unpleasant to himself. We have乖σ〃dn in Luke
(凧S(rpゾ19:44 et ad terra〃1 prosternent∫9 and to eorban afソ〃aδ、〃θ, or
pennan in.4rundel Psalter(J)105:26(likewise in D and F(4)):Et eleuavit
manu〃1 sua〃1 super・eos.°ut prosterneret eQS in deserto∫乃θα乃qプhand く ロ
heora ofer hig bcet hebenede hyg on westehe. We find gefcelan in A and
B,whereas E uses/coreastreccan, the pre血x of which is removed in I:he
astrehte, and P2 has todrifan. pennan is used in Chad 128-130:
rediit ipse solus, qui carmen caleste audierat, et prosternens se in
terrarn:‘Obsecro,, inquit....
レahi swi6e unrote ut eodon.6a cerde se an se bone heofonlicon
song geherde 7 benede hine on pa eor6an 7 cweδ....
Thus, since there are other possibilities as an Old English word for
prosterno thanノセα〃an, the choice of this verb in 34.16(ノ’eol...fceder
/eotu〃のis not a coincidence, the translator having used the word that
could retain the original alliteration. We see an example like this in the
Psalters cited in Yamanouchi(1990:105), where he foundプ)7rnj物1, a typi-
cally Anglian word for、ρeccator is used exceptionally in/ELS‘‘to satisfy
the need for alliteration.”
The same alliterative tendency is in 35.12:1)ater.pill∬伽θ(R l pater
cαr∫∬ime, R2 pater piil∬’〃le);Du arfcestaノ詑der(also in 4.14 for piu〃1
genitorem, and in 18.12 mara〃α惚辞〃e∬e, to which Goolden emended
/testne∬θin the manuscript, for plenius...pietatem)(5).・4惚3∫αノ詑dθr
is not a case of genuine alliteration in a Germanic context but the adjec-
tiveαr一プ詑5’is a bahuvrihi compound with l)oth of the two components
having substantial meaning and the/f/in arfcest must have been only
slightly Iess strong than/f/in!teder, which has virtually the same effect as
alliteration.(There are several alternatives for pius:arfu1, which also con-
tains/f/at the beginning of its second syllable, and geleaffu1, which does
not;the Iatter could well have been chosen, if the translator had l ?≠п@no
rhetorical consideration.)
The passage in 27.10-11is not’purely alliterative;it is mixed with con-
sonance, which, in a wider sense, can involve alliteration(cf. Lanham
(1991:7):【alliteration is】[o]riginally, recurrence of an initial consonant
sound(and so a type of[c】onsonance)). Then we can use the term
5
6 Koichi NAKAMuRA
homoeoprophoron, which is a“frequent repetition of the same con-
sonant amongst several successive words, particularly at the beginning of
words(die h加負ge Wiederholung des gleichen Konsonanten innerhalb
mehrerer aufeinanderfolgender W6rter, vornehmlich im Wortanlaut)”
(Lausberg(1960;19903:§975)). Therefore, homoeoprophoron comprises
what is called“alliteration,, in Germanic, which can actually be called
parhomoeon, a subcategory of homoeoprophoron. As MartianusCapella, a Carthaginian and a ‘‘frUhe, heidnische Enzyklopadist,,
(Knappe(1996:75)), says,‘‘It is〃1アtacis〃zus when the connection of
words is scattered with the constant repetition of Ietter M, as you say, . Lv
‘mammam lpsam amo quasl meam anlmam,”(Lausberg(1960;19903:
§975)),we can call the following“homoeoprophoron”(=“alliteration”
in a broader sense), and if we further specify, it is“kappacismus”in the
original and“sigmacismus”or“polysigma”in the Old English:
Miscetur vox cantu modulata cum cordis ut discumbentes una cum
rege magna voce clamantes laudare coeperunt.
pare hearpan Eweg mid win量umum Sange gemEegnde. And Se gyngc
silf and ealleレeレar andwearde waeron micelne stefne clipodon and
hine heredon.(26.13-16)
The rhythmical repetition of/k/seems to enliven the description of the
feast just as the musical instruments do, while the slight“sigmacismus”in
the Old English is not so dense as to engender any tangible effect.
In 28.3-4 the succession of/1/(=lambdacismus)is converted to that
of/h/:
Laudant omnes liberalitatem puellae(=Rl,2)
ealleレa men hire gife heredon 6e hig gesawon.
The Old English is quite explicative, and there is no necessity to use hire
and 乃’g in particular, which suggests the translator,s deliberate
homoeoprophoron. The relative clauseδθ乃なgesawo〃is added anew,
and the abstract noun 1’わθrα〃tatem is put into much more concrete gife
rather than rumheortne∬θ(6). On the contrary、ρue〃αθbecomes simply
hかe rather than direct bαas mαede〃θ5. Closer translation would be some-
thing like ea〃θ(ウa〃len/heredo〃bces〃2cedenes ru〃iheortne∬θ, which
does not yield any alliteration or homoeoprophoron.(The Old English
word for laudo is confined to her’αηin Psalms.)Moreover, the noun rum-
heortnes is defini専ely associated with℃hristian virtue(〃bera〃α∫and
6
Rhetorical Analysis of Historia.4po〃onii Regis Tyri and Old English、Apo’lonius of Tyre 7
’argitas)and out of seven occurrences excluding those in glosses in/4
Microfiche Concordance, the adj ective ru〃iheort(のρ5’lis=δorψcλ舜9)is
attested only twice in a work that is not overtly religious;it is used for
describing Hro6gar in Beo l799 and 2110. Therefore this word seems to
be quite unfit for the description of the behaviour of a royal princess of
Cyrene, who is anything but a sacerdos, or a war hero. This is probably
one of the reasons the translator employed otherwise unconventional gptu
for 〃bera〃tas.
More often the Old English alliteration is independent, i.e. not the
reflex of the original as in 6.4-5 and 30.16-17:
Regio genere ortus in matrimonio filiam tuam peto.
Ic eom so61ice of cynelicum cynne cumen and ic bidde pinre dohtor
me tO gemaeCCan.
Cives tui sumus, nobilibus natalibus geniti(R2 Ciues tui sumus,
locupletes, bonis natalibus geniti).
We syndon pyne ceastergewaran of∂ae6elum gebyrdum geborene.
We且nd no less than且ve words beginning with/m/in 2.6-8, with no al-
literation in the original, which, however, has quite dense“mytacismus”:
Quae dum ad nubilem venisset aetatem, multi eam in matrimonio
postulabant cum magna.,.dotis quantitate;..。.
Mid biレe heo becom to giftelicre yldo,pa gyrnde hyre maenig meere
man micele mεer6a beodende.
There is no corresponding word for〃zαere in G, nor in R1(multi eam in
matri〃ionium petebant), nor in R2, which is identical with G. The word
for dotis is〃1αerδa. The latter is generally used for rumor, ma8nitudo,
and miracutu〃1, things that have particularly nothing to do with gifts
from suitors. So the addition of mcere beginning with/m/just before
mcerδa makes us suspect that the choice of this word for dos was made in
consideration for the alliterative effect;it could have been giefu or selen.
Quite contrary to the examples given above, even explicit alliteration or
homoeoprophoron in the original can be ignored;we cannot expect anY.
consistency as far as the rhetoric is concerned:
Et quis patriae meae principem potuit proscribere?
7
8 Koichi NAKAMuRA
Hwa mihte me fordeman, minre agenreレeode ealdorman?(13.5-6)
The repetition of labial plosive/P/has the effect of indicating
Apollonius,s anger and surprise. This passion seems to be expressed in
the translation by moving the core word fordeman in front, the equiva-
1ent of which is at the end of the original sentence.
1.2There are some examples of homoioteleuton:
si me amares, doleres(RI si amares, utique doleres tuam doctrinam).
gif 6u me lufodest, bu hit besorgOdest(33.5).
The correspondence is that of conjugation and might not have been inten-
tionally introduced, as Wine(1993:56)observes:
Since homoeoteleuton can occur in infiected languages incidentally-
because case, gender, and number must agree-to qualify as a figure
homoeoteleuton must serve some purpose recognizable by thereader that distinguish the aural pattern from the mere accident of
grammar.
In this case the two elements cannot be closer, while the meanings of the
two roots are』in contradiction, a sort of oxymoro口;it obviously・creates a
junction between those two verbs which semantically oppose with each
other.
The original homoioteleuton in 33.16-18, combined with asyndeton
(and variation in the last sentence by putting it into an interrogation)hap-
pily ampli且es the sense of anger that one of the suitors has with Ardalio
who has just told a Iie that he had once been shipwrecked, but the transla-
tor did not capture that feeling:
Mecum litteras didicisti.
naufragium fecisti?
Portam civitatis nunquam existi. Ubi
Mid meレu boccrecft leorngdest and 6u nzefre butonレare ceastre
geate fram me ne come. Hwar gefore 6u forlidennesse?
The sense of excitement and indignation engendered by the repetition of
the identical sound at the end of every sentence is completely lost in the
Old English.
Melodious parallelism and homoioteleuton in 7.9-10 are also absent in
the translation:
8
Rhetorical Analysis of.Histor’α!lpo〃onii Regis Tyri and Old English 4ρo〃onius of Tyre 9
Qui cum scrutatur sententiam, luctatur cum sapientia,._invenit
quaestionis solutionem,...(RI quam cum sapienter scrutaretur,
R2 dum scrutatur sententiam, luctatur cum sapientia).
midレyレe he smeade ymbe beet ingehyd, he hit gewan mid
wisdome....
Besides two types of且gures, we have a homoeoprophoron in sententiam
and saρientia and there is a rhythmical assonance involved in Lentia-in
both words, which is too subtle to be incorporated into translation. This
parallelism helps describe Apollonius’s ef正brt of solving the riddle and
arouse the feeling of suspense.
The sequence of four identical long vowels in the King Arcestrates’s
speech gives the sense of royal dignity in 33.20-21 which contrasts well
with the homoioteleuton(-isti)above:
Potest enim fieri ut quod ego minus novi, tu intelligas qui praesens
affuisti(R I quia praesens fuisti, R2 qui interfuisti).
Ea6e meeg gewur6an baet pu witeレzet ic nat,6u 6e par andweard
waere.
If we follow Lausberg(1960;19903:§§725-729)and Lanham(1991:84),
and call the original above homoioteleuton, we are obliged to exclude
qui, because nouns and adjectives(and pronouns)are in the sphere of
homoioptoton, for Aquila Romanus says,
6μo‘6πω70レ,simile casibus:hoc ex eo nomen accepit, quod
membra illa, id est xdiλor, ih eosdem casus cadunt ad hunc modum:
>huic igitur socios vestros criminanti et ad bellum vos cohortanti
et omnibus modis, ut in tumultu essetis, molientiく:haec enim tria
in eundem casum determinata sunt.
(homoioptoton,“resembling in cases”:it is so called because the
members, that is,πdiλor, fall into the same cases in this manner...:
thus these three【ニcriminanti, cohortanti and molienti]are marked
with the same case.)(Lausberg(1960;19903:§729)
The example in 36.12-14 is an
original does not have one:
independent homoioteleuton;the
Et aperto sacrario oblatisque muneribus coepit Apollonius...
effari et dicere....
9
10 Koichi NAKAMuRA
pEet haliern wear66a geopenod andレa lac wacron in gebrohte and
Apollonius ongan 6a sprecan and cweδan....
What sort of effect should we expect here, in such a neat techhique of the
translator?There is no urgency produced here as the examples above.
Wine(1993:64)says that“エh】omoeteleuton builds a rhythm which inten-
sifies the semantic value of the words as it progresses.”We can feel a
steady rhythm of a calm prelude after which Apollonius starts to talk
about his situation in front of the lady whom he takes for Diana the god-
dess. Then comes the climax of the whole story:the lady turns out to be
his long-lost wife Arcestrate. This steady rhythm, therefore, serves as the
sharp contrast with the burst of joy shortly afterwards.
Another example of this figure is combined with asyndeton(41.25-28)
and it seems to be the latter that makes the passage expressive. We cite
this at theend of l.3.
1.3The Latin of this work is generally not polysyndetic but when it is,
because of the translator,s consciousness of rhetorical effect, the Old
English can readily follow it as in 42.14-20:
Et donavit ei ducenta sextercias auri et fecit eum comitem suum
usque dum vixit. Hellanicus vero, qui ei de Antiocho nunciaverat,
Apollonio...obtulit se et ait:‘Domine rex, memor esto Hellanici,
servi tui.’Et apprehendit manum eius Apollonius et erexit eum et
osculari coepit et fecit eum divitem et ordinavit eum comitem.
Him geaf 6a se cyngc twa hund gildenra paenega and haefde hine to
geferanレa hwileレe he lifede. Hellanicus eac pa to him com, se him
aer cydde hwaet Antiochus cync be him gedemed haefde, and he
cwee6 toレam cynge:‘Hlaford cyng, gemun Hellanicus, pinne
レeow.’Da genam hine Apollonius be bare hand and araerde hine up
and hine cyste and hine weligne gedide and sette hine him togeferan.
Not only conjunctions are repeated but also adverbδa ’s appear frequent-
ly, the equivalents of which are not in the original. This repetition of et
obviously contributes to the enlivened expression of the joy of
Apollonius, when he found the fisherman, who had once helped him, and
Hellanicus, who let Apollonius know his dooming danger. Its effect is
kept naturally intact in the Old English, which had still its inherent aMni-
ty with and-verbosity. It was at the stage of the development of the prose
which was not yet sophisticated according to the classical standard, as
Ogawa(1991:64)observes:
10
Rhetorical Analysis of Historia.Apo〃oni’、Regis乃・ri and Old English、Apo〃onius of乃ノre 11
It should be noted that these various expressions[X...and cwoeδ,
juxtaposition of words and phrases, hit gelamp...btet,...j have
in common the effect of presenting a sequence of actions and events
exactly as they occurred and are, in that sense, very illustrative of an
unsophisticated narrative style of the OE work.
There is a difference in attitude between the deliberate repetition in the
Latin and the inevitably imitative succession of and in the Old English;
the latter possibly could not have dispensed with it, whereas the former
could have done so(as can be illustrated in the following example). We
find more cases in which original non-polysyndetic, if not asyndetic,
sentences are converted to a passage full of and’s:
vidit puerum nudum per plateam currentem’oleo unctum,
praecinctum sabano, ferentem ludos iuveniles ad gymnasium per-
tinentes, magna voce clamantem et dicentem:.。..
レageseah he zenne nacodne cnapan geond pa straete yrnan, se wees
mid ele gesmerod and mid scitan begird and beer iungra manna
plegan on handa to 6am bae6stede belimpende and cliopode micelre
staefne and cwa∋6....(18.26-29)
The original uses oneθ’, whereas we find fourαπ(f’s in the translation.
This is due to the presence of the circumstantial participles peculiar to
Latin(together with Greek and Sanskrit, for that matter), which provide
compact, dense constructions(φξρo〃7α=ノlarentem=and bcer;βodi vτor=
clamante〃!ニand C〃Oρode).
The sense of vehement joy in 39.12-15 is lost by repeated an(i’s in
38.12-17:
Sonat in tota civitate illa Tyrium Apollonium regem uxorem
suam... cognovisse.... Fit ingens laeticia,,.. organa
disponuntur. Fit ab Apollonio convivium civibus. Omnes laetuntur.
andレa∋t word sprang geond eal peet land peet Apollonius, se meera
cyngc, haefde funden his wif, and bar wear60rmεete blis, andレa
organa waeron getogene andレa biman geblawene, and bar wearδ
bli6e gebeorscipe gegearwod betwuxレam cynge and pam folce.
The immense joy of the Ephesians is described in full force not only by
means of asyndeton but also by the structural parallelism of verb-initial
sentences(Sonat..,.Fit....Fit.,..), which obviously intensifies the
effect of enumerating of the things that produce festive mood.(This
11
12 Koichi NAKAMuRA
enumeration corresponds with what Wine(1993:31)calls“a catalogue
device”.)In general, enumeration supported by parallelism is closely asso-
ciated with the sense of abundance. Moreover, two sentences beginning
with fit make an example of anaphora,廊po朋配〃7 and laetuntur a
homoioteleuton, andガ’...1αθ’’”α...organa disponuntur a chiasmus.
The anaphora is retained as par wearδ, perhaps without any rhetorical
consideration and its force is much weaker than the original because of
the intermediateα〃び加o㎎αηαwceron gθ’ogθηθand baわ肋αη
geblawene.
In 41.25-28 we且nd another example where asyndeton is turned into
polysyndeton:
Moratur ibi mensibus sex, navigat...ad Pentapolim,...
civitatem Cirinam. Ingreditur ad regem Arcestratem....Gaudet
in ultimo senectutis suae rex Arcestrates. Vidit neptem cum
marito.(RI Postea uero uale dicens ciuibus nauigat....Et uidit
Archistrates且liam cum marito..。;R2 is as asyndetic as G)
He wunodeレaレar six mon6as and for siδ6an on scipe to
Pentapolim,レare cireniscan birig, and com to Arcestratesレamcynge, and se cyng blissode on his・ylde peet he geseah his nefan mid
hire were.
Here again, verb-initial sentences heaped up with no conjunctions in
between contribute to the lively expression of the joy and also of the
speed of the narrative, which cannot be felt in the translation. Two pairs
of homoioteleuta(moratur/ ingreditur and gaudet/ v’d”)are effaced and
the urgency produced by the parallelism of verb-initial sentences is also
absent in the translation on account of unavoidable adding and moving
of the subject(乃θand se(ツng).
At the scene of Apollonius’sjourney on the sea, the asyndetic construc-
tion, in a similar manner to that of 39.12-15 above, amplifies the
impetuosity of the tempest which suddenly attacks him:
Qui dum navigaret, intra duas horas mutata est pelagi fides,
concitatur tempestas, pulsat mare sidera caeli, ventis mugit mare.
Midレiレe hig ongunnon pa rowan and hi for6werd weeron on heora
weg,レa wear66are sεe smiltnesse awzend feeringa betwux twam
tidum and wear6 micel reownes aweht, swaレaet seo see cnysteレa
heofonlican tungla and beet gewealcレara y6a hwa6erode midwindum.(16.15-19)
12
Rhetorical Analysis of Historia.4po〃onii Regis Tyri and Old English、Apollonius(ゾTyre 13
The sequence mutata est...concitatur...putsat...(ventis?〃zugit
with no conjunction obviously evokes the sense of danger, whereas in the
Old English, four clauses are connected with two and,s and swa bαat,
which leads to a plain, objective narrative contrasted with the tense,
dramatic original. There may be some echo here of the earlier versions of
which G‘‘is a condensed paraphrase of several lines of verse’,(Goolden
(1958:49)).
1.4Chiasmus is quite neatly reproduced in 34.17-20:
amo naufragum..。Apollonium, meum praeceptorem, cui si me
non tradideris, amittis filiam tuam.
Ic lufigeレone forlidenan man...,Apollonium ic wille, minne
lareow, and gif pu me him ne silst, pu forlEetst 6ine dohtor.
R2 is as chiastic as G, while the effect of chiasmus in R1, which helps
show Arcestrate’s passion to marry Apollonius, is decreased by the inter-
mediate prepositional phrase a praesenti:RI cui si non me tradideris, a
praesen ti perdes/ilia〃1, R2 cui si〃le non dederis, a〃zisisti/71ia〃1.
The one in 24.6-8 has no equivalent in the original, an independent
chiasmus:
Si vero molestum non est, indica mihi nomen tuum et casus tuos
(=R1,2).
Nuレonne gifδe to hefig neレince, sege meレinne naman andレin
gelymp.arece me.
Judging from such examples as l)a gelamρ肋5αr〃cum gelimpe(1.8),
ノ4」ρo〃onius... areh te ea〃θ his 9θか鵬ワ (24.13), bu wo1と1est w〃αη his
nambn and his gelimρ(24.16-17), and the fact that of all the 27 examples
besides three above in/l Mたrofiche Concordance, we have no other
ge〃〃rp as a direct object of a transitive verb, except 16Gra〃1’s use for a(㌔
cident’a, probably secgan and gθか即cannot co-occur(7), hence the need
of using some other verb(areccan in this case). But, since it could well
have been after na〃lan, i.e, sege〃le、〃inne〃α〃lan and arece〃le.bin
gelymp, the fact does not annul the possibility ofthe deliberate chiasmus
in the passage. This demonstrates that the translator not only tried to
retain, if it is at all possible, the original stylistic features, but also embel-
lish his translation, independent of the Latin in front of him, just as he
13
14 Koichi NAKAMuRA
did in 7.2-3(6.4-5)and 31.17-18(30.16-17)by employing alliteration
(cf.1.10r by polyptoton in 1.5.)
Another example of an independent chiasmus:
Quam videns Apollonius cum filia et genero concurrerunt ad pedes
eiUS.
Midレamレe Apollonius peet geseah, he mid his a6ume and mid his
dohtor to hyre urnon and feollon ealle to hire fotum,....(36.9-
11)
As far as late Old English prose is concerned, verbs usually come just
after the subjects in principal clauses, so urnon here is in a marked
position(8). This, however, is not due to a stylistic reason but a syntactic
one;it is impossible to say,*he urnon mid his aδume but we cannot see
whether this plural form is the result of the prepositional phrase mid his
aδume...or of the conjunction and, as Mitchell(1985:§1502)
observes. The original shows the identical structure, Aρo〃onius cu〃2ガ〃α
et genero concurrerunt with a singular subj ect followed by a prepositional
phrase and a perfect plural form of the verb. About this sort of sentence,
Leumann-Hofmann-Szantyr(1972:433)says,“Bei einer Verbindung von
zwei Subj.durch cum statt et wird von Cato...auch in den Inschr.,der
Plur. gesetzt.”The example given above belongs to the“less strange”sub-
category of this phenomena with cu〃i governing plural(or more than one
singular)nouns:“Dieser Plur. ist weniger auffallig, wenn das mit cum
angefUgte Nomen im Plur. steht oder wenn dem Verbum vorausgehende
Satzbestimmung den Plur. verlangt”(ibid.,433-434).
In 9.10-13 two successive chiasmi do not have their equivalents in the
original. Simple parallelism of the Latin in combination with
homoioteleuton(-it)indicates the calm, steady flow of time, and
consequently the royal tranquillity even in times of di伍culty:
Apollonius vero prior attigit patriam suam introivitque domum
suam et aperto scrinio codicum suorum inquirit quaestiones
omnium philosophorum omniumque Chaldaeorum.
Ac Apolloniusレeahhwεe6re aer becom to his agenan and into his
huse eode and his bocciste untynde and asmeade pone reedels eefter
ealra u6witena and Chaldea wisdome.
In the sequence beco〃z...and...eode and...untアnde and as〃zeade...,
which can be schematized,“VX and XV and XV and VX”, with V
14
Rhetorica1 Analysis of Historia Apo〃onii Regis Tyri and Old English、Apo〃oη如5 qプ7ンre 15
standing for the verbs, lie two different kinds of symmetrical phrases:one
with the verbs on the rims(becom...and。..eode)and the other with
the verbs contained inside of the chiastic framework(...untynde and
asmeade,..). The first verb becom may be a fly in the ointment;it disturbs
the otherwise perfect homoioteleuton(-de). Or some may consider this as
agood variation, as is witnessed in Cynewulf’s works(Wine(1993:62)),
but ApT does not seem to have attained that stage of rhetorical
development. The original seems to insinuate the princely calmness by its
rather square parallelism. Whereas the Old English, with its superb,
ingenious chiasmi, reveals the opposite mental state of Apollonius hidden
beneath his apParent tranquillity;one could even feel his irritation and
haste from the contact of two verbs unリノnde and asmeade. Moreover the
two internal pairs of XV伽to his huse eode and his bocciste untynde)con-
stitute a parallelism. One of the possible collstructions such as Ac
APO〃oniUS beahhwceδre cer beCO〃i to his agenan and eode into his huse
and un加de his bocciste and as〃2θαdθ加ηθrα}dθなψθr eα〃側δW’tena
and Chaldea wisdome is almost the same as the original in that all the
verbs come in front of the direct objects or prepositional phrases. But un-
like the Latin, which uses only one et and one enclitic〈q〃e, this translation
would suffer dull monotony because the repetition of and is further em-
phasized by the repetition of the same cluster VX that follows it. The
ingenious chiastic construction containing parallelism tactfully enlivens
the otherwise m、onotonous passage.
The Latin chiasmus is ignored in 40.7-9:
si quis tamen, apud inferos sensus est, relinque Tartaream domum
et genitoris tui vocem exaudi.
gif acnig andgit sy on helle,1εetレu paet cwicsuslene hus and gehir 6u
6ines faeder staefne.
Probably it was possible to retain the chiasmus by saying 1α~’如♪αヲt
cw’(rsuslene hus andδines fceder strefne gehir, if we consider the passage
given above(24.6-8),〈fu」bonne 9びδe’o hefig nebincθ,5θ9θ〃zebinne na-
man andbin gelymρ arece me, but there may be no signi血cance in keeping
the original chiasmus here other than the efrect of“ornament”if we use
the term in Wine(1993). One may, however, feel the indignation of
Apollonius by the position of exaud’which is clearly highlighted, judging
from the observation in Leumann-Hofmann-Szantyr(1972:403)that the
end-position of a verb is much less frequent in late Latin(9).
15
16 Koichi NAKAMuRA
1.5We have an independent polyptoton in 36.17-18:
regis vero Antiochi quaestionem solvebam ut filiam
matrimonio acciperem(R1,2 qaestionem exsolui).elUS ln
Ic araedde Antiochus raedelsレaes cynges toレonレεet ic his dohtor
underfenge me to gemεeccan.
Since polyptoton in its strict sense refers to the‘‘repetition of words in
different cases”(Dupriez(1991:246)), it might be better to call this
paronomasia, which is virtually a word-play, but the atmosphere of the
scene above is not appropriate for that. If we follow the definition of
Lanham(1991:117)that it is a“[r】epetition of words from the same root
but with different endings”, we can consider it an example of semi-
polyptoton. Be that as it may, that this choice of words of the translator
is not whimsical becomes manifest if we look at another example like
Tu es Tyrius...
docuisti,....
Apollonius, tu es maglster meus, qul me
レueart Apollonius, min Iareow, pe me Iaerdest....(39.8-9)
The patterns“magister=lareow”and“docereニ1eeran”are well-established;we can find no other words than lareow and lceran for
magister and doceo in Old English Gospels, for example. It is intriguing
to note that Rl, unlike R2 and G, has also polyptoton here:
RI tu es magister, qui docta manu me docuisti;R2 tu es magister
meus qui me docuisti....
It is not apPropriate to use doctor instead of〃lagister here and say, tu es
doctor,(1ui(docta〃lan u?〃le docuisti(cf.35.13-15α〃zo...14」ワo〃oniu〃1,
meum praeceptorem(=lareow)). So the translator/writer seems to have
resorted to another word(doctのon which to form his polyptoton.
There is a little loose polyptoton based on the same words but with
more distance between the two words than in the case above:Da ahsodon
hig hine and cwcedon. lare・W. we witun bcet bu rihte sprycst and’ lcerst
(Luke(ws(]P)20:21).
1.6 We find paromoiosis in both:
Fugere quidem potest, effugere non potest.
16
Rhetorical Analysis of Historia/lpollon’i Regis 1ンr’and Old English Apo〃onius qノ乃,re 17
Fleon he meeg, ac he a∋tfieon ne maeg.(11.10)
This particularly exemplifies what Archibald(1991:15)observes:“【Tlhe
writer does not make use of simile or metaphor, but he is not averse to
wordplay, rhetorical strategies, learned language, and literary quota-
tion.”Since paromoiosis is made between the clauses of approximately or
exactly equal length, the difference of words in them stands out.(In this
case, however, it is not even a word but a pre且x that matters.)The essence
of this figure, then, lies in the contrast created within the similarity of the
outer framework. The contrast is between fugere/fleon and effugere/
cetfleon, the difference being Prefixesθand cet that influence the meaning
of the roots considerably. Inαc-clause it is not unusual for the verb to
come at the end of it. Therefore it is the initial position of the first verb
/7eon that contributes to the hapPy rendering of the original;it could have
been He〃2α~g卿oηαc he cetfleon ne mceg, with the persuasive tone of
paromoiosis impaired. Raith(1956:36)attributes this raising of the verb
(ノ7eon)to the translator,s intention of emphasizing(“Ein Satztei1, der
hervorgehoben werden sol1, kann vorgezogen werden...,,). That is true,
but as we can see above, there is more than that;he wanted to retain the
original parallelism, which serves as the frames that highlight the
heterogeneous element(s)inside them.
1.7Epiphora/antistrophe plus alliteration in 13.4 contrasts sharply
with its translation:
Cavendus es. Cave te, quia proscriptus es.
pe is so61ice micelレearf beetレu 6e warnige, for6amレe 6u eart
fordemned.
This alliteration with epiphora obviously leads to the lively expression
of the urgency that threatens Apollonius,s life. The translation
unfortunately does not make us feel that;this impersonal construction
followed by a noun clause would have been awkward in a real speech
or at Ieast so in what the Anglo-Saxons thought could have been in
the pseudo-speech reproduced in prose works. But we must admit that
“【t】hough some examples of Old English prose are doubtless closer to
contemporary speech than others, variations of register between the
colloquial and the formal within prose are not easily identihed”(Godden
(1992:520)).We cannot, therefore, claim the colloquialism or Iiterariness
of this impersonal construction beon beaiプba~t, but there is a marked
17
18 Koichi NAKAMuRA
difference in frequency between this and agan」わθαがセbcet, which virtually
means the same thing;of all the 148 examples of beon」bealプpcet 10.8%
(16)are found in Wulfstan, but he uses agan bearfe bαet more than any-
one else, for he uses 25.0%(13)of all its 52 examples. The addressing
power of agan♪earfe bcet must be stronger than that of beon」beaヴbcet in
that the former calls for a personal subject, and that may have something
to do with the fact that 51.9%(27)of the examples ofαgα〃bearfe bret are
employed in homilies, while the rate is 33.1%(49)for beon pearf」bcet.
Thus, instead ofbe’530δ〃cθ〃1’cθ1クθαヴクαヲちbuδθwarn’9θgiven above,
we could well have(perhaps)more persuasive and pressing pu ahst soδ〃cθ
micel bearfe bcet buδe warn’gθ. Though most of the examples ofαgα〃p
earf(~bcet,90.4%of which are in religious contexts, have we, gθ,〃la〃,
ノblc and h’as a subject and a few in poems haveた, we have no reason for
rejecting the possibility of more forcible如ahst bearfe bcet here.
II. Anatomy of the Old English Verbosity
2.O There are several patterns in which the Old English translation
seems to say too much without giving significant information. This is
closely related with the Latin asyndeton and the Old English
polysyndeton we handled in 1.3. Other factors are various participles
peculiar to classical languages, abstract nouns, the difference in innate
syntactic preference between the two languages, which has much to do
with the difference in the stage of development of prose style.
2.l Verbosity by Paraphrasing
2.1.10n the whole, the Old English words are more concrete than the
Latin counterparts, if they exist at all. The translator,stendency to be less
abstract leads to the longer sentence in 22.19, for example:
Bone rex, ecce homo cui tu benignitatem animi tui ostendis.
Du goda cyngc, efneレes manレeレu swa wel wi6 gedest....
Authors and translators of religious works would have used/7e〃zsu〃1nes
for ben ig〃’tαs. In a secular work like.4p 7「, the translator may have avoided
using this word for mundane generosity, which was to him incompatible
with divine one. This is parallel with the example of g卿rather than
literal ru〃zheortnes for liberalitas in 28.3/29.3 discussed in l.1.
Fre〃lsu〃lnes was probably too loaded with Christian connotations to be
18
Rhetorical Analysis of Historia/Apo〃onii Regis 7ンr’and Old English Apo〃onius qブTyre 19
employed here, judging from the fact that it is only attested in overtly
religious context(28 times)except one citation from a gloss in A
ノ協crq/7che Concordance. Another reason for not having used
fremsumnes is that this may have been felt too abstract to describe the
King’s presents if we consider the translator’s tendency to be concrete.
TrUe, the phrase bebu swa we’wiδ gedest is as abstract in meaning as the
original;it does not furnish us with the information how generosity was
shown by the king. But it seems more colloquial than the original thanks
to the avoidance of an abstract noun.
Old English does not lack the verb to/ish(ノiscian)but in 18.17-18this
word is not used and the translation seems, from a semantic point of
view, unnecessarily periphrastic:
Paupertas quaecunque est suthciat nobis. Mecum piscabis(Rl
mecum laborabis et piscaberis, R2 mecum piscaberis).
genihtsumige unc bam mine litlanεehta and far 6e on fiscno6 mid
me.
It is certain that fiscian is less attested than海ηψ. In/1ノレficrofiche Co〃-
cordance, we have 16/iscian’s(including/7x(i)an,s)(10), while fiscn ob
(including fixn ob)is attested 36 times. There is no example of faran on
/iscn ob;the nearest we find is/bhn(昭S(功り21.3 Da ci・vceδ si〃zon、ρetrus
to・him.’C W〃e gan on77xaδ(uado piscari, tTπdV7ω diλ・EvEの;ba cwcedon
h〃o him and we}wy〃dδ ga〃midクe. Some verbs are scarcely used in the
imperative forms, and fisca mid me might have been intolerable for the
translator(we have no such form in MC). But we can think as well that
the alliterative tendency of the Anglo-Saxons may have, consciously or
unconsciously, manifested itself in faran on fiscnoδ, because it could
have been Cum on fiscnob mid me with no alliteration, as we can surmise
from gan on fixaδ in/bhn (rVS(:ρ? 21.3.Then it means that the translator
sacrificed the original asyndeton and a condensed sentence that well indi-
cate the fisherman,s straightforward, unsophisticated character, for his
(and his race’s)purely formal, linguistic preference, which, at least in this
case, does not seem to contribute to anything as to the description of the
speaker,s character or the situation into which Apollonius was plunged.
In l6。23-25 simpleθ∬e pulsus is paraphrased into a more concrete,
longer description:
Apollonius solus tabulae beneficio in Pentapolitanorum est litore
pulsus, hoc est Cyrinorum.
19
20 Koichi NAKAMuRA
Apollonius ana becom mid sunde to Pentapolimレamlande andレar up eode on 6am strande.
Clrlnlscan
One might wonder if the translator really rendered est pulsus into
becom...andbar uρ eode. RI has approximately the same passage here
as G, whereas R2 adds one sentence after pulsus:
Apollonius solus tabulae beneficio in Pentapolitanorum est litore
pulsus, gubernatore pereunte;et deo uolonte proicitur fatigatus in
Cyrenen regionem.
It may be possible that something like the underlined part above existed
in the manuscript used by the translator.[〃】ar up eode onδam strande
is necessarily involved in the action expressed by the phrase esちρulsus
加〃tore but the latter is implicit and does not indicate shipwrecked
Apollonius,s own eflbrt of walking to the shore, which is in accordance
with the observation ofArchibald(1991:14):‘‘If HA is bare of psycholog-
ical detail, it is also almost entirely lacking in descriptive detail of more
concrete kinds.,, On the other hand the Old English describes in a
cinematic way the scene where Apollonius went on shore and it does not
allow us to imagine several situations of his landing because it is more
concrete than inexpressive est pulsus in〃tore. But this is probably better
explained by what Professor Ogawa calls‘‘juxtaposing two verbs in place of
one in the Latin original”, which serves to make“the narration easy to
follow, by giving a more matter-of-fact account of the process being
described”(Ogawa(1991:63))and what Markisch(1899:56)observes
brie且y:“Als letztes Mittel, den Sinn recht genau widerzugeben, benutzt
der Ubersetzer, dass er fUr ein lat. Wort oft mehrere engl. setzt....,,
The same degree of paraphrasing as the example above is in 2.5-6 but
this one does not add any extra information and is more restrained:
Hic habuit ex amissa coniuge filiam...speciosissimam incredibili
pulchritudine.
pises cyninges cwen wear60f life gewiten, be 6are he haefde ane
swi6e wlitige dohtor ungelifedlicre feegernesse.
Raith(1956:44)simply cites this example with the remark,“one sentence
is often separated into two sentences(‘in zwei Satze zerlegt,),,, but there
seems to be a definite reason behind it. To have a princess be his deadan
cwene is physically impossible;this Old English phrase cannot express the
situation that he had had a daughter between him and his wife he lost
20
Rhetorical Analysis of、Historia.Apo〃onii Regis 7ンri and Old English.Apo〃onius of Tyre 21
afterwards, while the condensed Latin phrase ex a〃zissa coniuge can
involve that rather complicated temporal relation:Latin is more flexible.
2.1.2Participles into Clauses
2.1.2.1The Old English tends to become longer because of the original
participial constructions, especially when relative clauses are used to
express what the Latin say with participles. The most frequent equiva-
lents of Latin participles are finite verbs followed or preceded by and,s,
e・9・
cives...exhilarati facti magnis acclamationibus gratias agentes
certatim frumenta portaba皿t.
hi weeron bli6e gewordene and him georne bancodon and to ge且ites
レone hwaete up baeron.(14、26-28)
Cives optantes eius beneficia remunerare ex aere ei statuam■■.
statuerunt, in foro stantem in dextra manu fruges tenentem, sinistro
pede modium calcantem,....
peet folc wear66a swa fagen his cystignessa and swaレancful paet
hig worhton him ane anlicnesse of are, and on 6are streete stod and
midレare swiレran hand bone hwaete heold and midレam winstran fet
レa mittan traed. ...(16.3-6)
In which,fact’corresponds to wa~ron gewordene and, gratias agentes to
クa〃codon and, 5’o〃te〃2 to and stod, tenente〃1 to a〃d heolと1, and
cα1cα班θ〃1 to and trced. This way of translation necessarily leads to and-
verbosity, hence we have polysyndeta discussed in l.3.(Many of and,s in
l.3could have been dispensed with without marring the style and mean-
ing very much, whereas most of and,s here are unavoidable, unless the
translator uses his native participles, rather awkwardly, as we且nd some
examples below.)To avoid too much polysyndetic construction, the trans-
lator sometimes cut the original sentence into two without employing
and, e.9.
Rex ut audivit...
resplclens eum alt....
,timens ne scelus suum pate丘eret, irato vultu
Mid py pe se cyningc gehirde...レa ondred heレeet hit to widcu6
waere. Beseahδa mid irlicum andwlitan to him and cwaeδ....
(6.24-26)
21
22 Koichi NAKAMuRA
Famulus vero secutus iuvenem...
coopertum.
vidit eum tribunario sordido
Se man 6a eode aefter Apollonio. Midレiレe he geseahレeet he waes
mid horhgum scicelse beweefed,....(20.27-28)
Rl is significantly different:.Fa〃zulus uero secutus est iuuene〃1, et ut uidit
eu〃1 sordido tribunario coOpertu〃z...α”....On C.C.C.3180n
which G is based, we have syntactically obscure Fa〃iulus...secutus
iuvenem et vidit eum. But if it was originally est secutus♂厩...as in
R1,the manuscript that our translator used might have had the same read-
ing and this would explain the presence of the〃1’d-clause, the equivalent
of which cannot be found in G, while we have an ut-clause in R1.The
correspondence of mid・with ut in 6.24-26 also con且rms this conjecture.
2.1.2.2The second largest group of equivalents of Latin participles is,
despite Goolden’s remark that Latin constructions are carefully avoided,
participles. That participles are not well rooted in Old English is obvious
from the fact that we have very few examples of them used independent-
ly, i.e. for Latin finite verbs or prepositional phrases, as in 28.19
Apo〃onius ingrediens egit gracias deo∫δar in eode Gode banciende....
This constitutes what Ogawa(1991:67)finds;he observes,‘‘those cases in
which the OE version has a more compressed structure are extremely
few.,, The following is the passage that shows‘‘a rare case of a profusion
of participles derived from the Latin”(Goolden(1958):52):
Dum rex cum suis ad pilae lusum exerceret, volonte deo miscuit se
Apollonius regi et dum decurrentem sustulit pilam, subtili velocitate
percussam ludenti regi remisit...remissamque rursus velocius
repercussit nec cadere passus est.
Da agan se cyngc plegan wiδhis geferan midレ06ere, and
Apollonius hine gemaegnde swa swa God wolde on 6aes cyninges
plegan and yrnende pone 6060r geleehte, and mid swiftre rzednesse
geslegene ongean geseende to 6am plegendan cynge. Eft he ageanasaende;he rεedlicとsloh swa he hine neefre feallan ne let.(20.6-11)
Decurrentem(emended from current’“to the running【king】”)goes with
P〃a〃1,so the translation should be boneアrnendan δoδo〆instead of
アrnende(cf. L uke(昭S(]p/ 22.44 Etプ’actus est sudor eius sicut guttae
5αη9痂is decurrentis’n terra〃1,’αη励アs swat}ヅαes・s}vγlce blodes droρan
on eorδan アrnende). Percu∬α〃1 corresponds to geslegene (=bone
22
Rhetorical Analysis of Historia.4po〃onii Regis Tyri and Old English.4po〃o〃’π5 qブ7ンre 23
geslegenanδoδor). The last participle rθ〃2∫∬α〃1 is substantivized and not
translated as the object of asrende, which is reasonable, for the Latin has
two pairs of deliberate chiastic polyptota(percussa〃1...rθ〃lisit(...ノ
rθ〃lissa〃lque...repercussit), and geslegene ongea〃gescande to δα〃1
plegendan(ツnge andbone ongean gescendan (δOδor] eft he agean ascende
would be precise but definitely pleonastic.
Many of the Old EngHsh participles in this group are the literal transla-
tion of 6『’cens:edictu〃1、proρosuit rex.∠lnt’ochus d’cθη3∫正18、〃α.Ant’ochus
∫θ(ッη’ηgc gθ∫e”e」bis geban bus cweδende(10.15-16).ρ245 cweδende is
absolutely acceptable, whereasμ5/pas cweδende seems impossible. Five
examples of cweδende in/1ρ7 are all preceded by餌5(4.18-19,10.16,
18.13,30.25,34.26).Both 1うus(rweδe〃de and cweδende pus are possible,
though the latter is extremely rare;there are l54 examples of如3
cweδen(ie/cwceδende and we have only one example of cwceδende bus in
all of AEIflic,s works, for example. Other variations we且nd in/Elfric are
mid体5㍑〃2 worde cwceδende,μ∬U〃1 worde CWαヲδθη(1θ,δα3 word
cweδende,(lysu〃1 wordu〃Z cweδende(twice),δiSU〃Z 6う醜〃ij wordu〃
cweδende(four times). Therefore we are probably justined in maintain-
ing that(?)bis/加s cweδende was implausible and that is why a preposi-
tional phrase[ceカcter b isu〃1 wordu〃2 is used for〃z7aec d’cens in 32.8
rather than literal(?)ク‘5/カα3 cweδende.
2.1.2.3To the third largest group belong the subordinate clauses of
various kinds:
Apollonius timens regini tui vires...nusquam comparuit.
Apollonius him ondraet pines rices
nahwar gewunian.(10.12-14)
ma∋gna swaレεet he ne dear
Deinde in solio gratissime fovit et exeunti(ニ7φ
oficiose dedit et post haec discessit.
tξt6VTのmanum
Andレa 6a he ut eode of 6am bae6e, he hine laedde beレare handa
and himレa si66anレanon gewaendeレaes wegesレe he aer com.(20.19-21)
2.2Verbosity by Adding or Expanding
2.2.1The translation sometimes becomes a little redundant because of
the addition of pronoun(s):
23
24 Koichi NAKAMuRA
Ipsa..。cum marito et filia et genero navem ascendit....
heo for mid hire were and mid hire a6ume and mid hire dohtor....
(39.15-17)
The equivalents of these three pronouns are not in the original. It is in
fact not only pronouns but also prepositions(〃z’d,s)that are added here.
If we consider such examples as C〃θ㎎o〃on indたas patr’2/Hw’ηε5θg5’
bu乃”binu〃7」危eder~(4.4-5),’ηv’ta〃1 paかis voluntate〃1/’o hかeノ陀dθr
w’〃an(4.10-11), accepto co〃l itatu/mid h is geferu〃霊(8.1)andノアκ〃諺ε配o
nave〃10nerari praceρ’t/乃θ’傭5ゆ〃iid h wcete gehlces珈(8.19), we
understand that the addition of pronouns is compulsory for the transla-
tor.
Two pronouns in 24.8-11 also seem indispensable:
Si necessitatis
Tharso reliqui.
nomen quaens,1n marl perdidi;si nobilitatem,
Gifδu for neode axsast eefter minum naman, ic secgeレe ic hine
forleas on see. Gif 6u wilt mine ae6elborennesse witan, wite 6uレaet
ic hig forlet on Tharsum.
The main reason the translation became longer is not the presence of the
pronouns themselves but added ic secge pe and the repetition of the sub-
ject ahd the verb in the protasis. G resorts to a rhetorical ellipsis and
retains only the object nobilitate〃1 in the second protasis, while Rl
repeats the verb, si〃o〃len (7uaeris, ノ4、ρo〃onius su〃1 uocatusj’5ゼ de
thesauro(7uaeris, in〃zari perdidi. This repetition is probably inevitable in
the Old English, and gゲ(mine?reδelborennesse,’cノ’orlet on Tharsu〃1
would become brachylogia rather than ellipsis, the difference being
that the former is“excessive brevity, pushed to the point of stylistic
obscurity’,(Dupriez(1991):82).
Latin adjectives and participles possess much卑ore adherence to the
nouns and their equivalents that they modify than those of Old English.
They are sometimes separated in a way impossible for the latter to follow
as they stand:
Homines tenues unum habent in nostrum ordinem aut promerendi
aut referendi beneficii locum hanc in nostris petitionibus operam
atque adsectationem.(Cicero, Pro Murena, XXXIV.70)
(Trivial men have only one opportunity of gaining or repaying
24
Rhetorical Analysis of撚’or’a Apo〃onii 1~egis乃ノri and Old English/lpo〃onius of 7ンre 25
favour concerning our class,[that is】this work(;accompanying)
in our candidature and the supPort in canvassing.)
This is why the pronoun is repeated in 16.26-28:
ONeptune, fraudator hominum, deceptor innocentium, Antiochorege crudelior,....
Eala pu sEe Neptune, manna berea且gend and unscae66igrabeswicend,レu eart waelreowraレonne Antiochus se cyngc.
The first bu was supplied to make sure that Neptune is vocative, whereas
bu eart is added in order to supplement the otherwise weak bond between
the subject and the adjective:bu sca 1>eptune,〃lanna bereafigend and
unscceδδigra besw’cend, wce〃eowra bonne.4配’ochus 5θ(ッngc, which,
mutatis mutandis, might have been permitted in poetry, though.
Sometimes even the noun referred to by the pronoun is not in the
original as in 6.8-9:
‘Iuvenis, nosti filiae meae nuptiarum condicionem?’ Apollonius ait:
‘Novi et ad portam vidi’(Rl ad portae fastigium).
‘pu iunga ma皿, canst 6uレone dom mynra dohtor gifta?’
Apollonius cwae6:‘lc can pone dom and ic hine eetレam geate
geseah.,
8’non inveneris, huc rεvθr’erθ∫Gびδu ne/inde ncenne be、〃θ9θ〃1’〃5’an
w〃θ,wcend bonne hider ongean(18.15-17)would make us suspect the
sentence lc can and retpa〃i geate geseah for・Movi et adportam vidi might
have been unacceptable, as far as the speech in the prose is concerned.
2.2.2An example such as
‘Quis vestrum naufragium fecit?’Unus ex his Ardalio nomine ait:
‘Ego,
‘Hwilc eower is forliden?’Da cwaeδheora an se hatte Ardalius:‘Ic
eom forliden’(32.20-21)
probably suggests that there is some innate limitation to brevity in Old
English. One might wonder if the Anglo-Saxons could have said simply 1ご
in this case. Even Modern Englishmen cannot use only a simple nomina-
tive form l in this situation. Still, the dialogue Hw〃c eower is/b〃iden 2-1ご
25
26 Koichi NAKAMuRA
eomノ∂〃’dθ〃is like a pattern practice in an elementary textbook of Old
English conversation. In Beo, ApT, and Gospels, in many parts of which
some colloquialism might be expected, there is no example of one-word
sentence lc. The nearest would beルlatt(昭SCρノ21.30ノ童”〃θ respondens
α’t:Eo, do〃伽θ,・・Dαandswarode 5θhim and cwceδ〃aford’c gaり
ルfσrk(mSCp?14.62 Tu es Christus/71ius Benedicti~Iesus aute”1 dixit””・’
EgO SU〃i; eart bu crist bces gebletsoda〃gode∬unu,’・1)a srede se hvalen.°た
θo〃1,andノ∂hn(WSCρノ9.3814 t〃le ait.°Credo, do〃line,1)αcwaeδhe
drihten.たgelyfe. If the one-word sentence 1ごwas not acceptable for the
Anglo-Saxons, there was no choice but to add eom/brl’den in 32.20-21,
and judging from.Mark (WSCp714.62, it could have been ic eom. This
kind of verbosity is different in quality from other types in that this was
probably unavoidable.
Asentence belonging to the same category is il110.5-6:
‘Ohominem improbum!Scis et interrogas!,
‘Eala hu manful manレu eart,6uレe wast paetレu aefter axsast!’
Aconjunctionθ’is removed and the homoioteleuton is more complete
(一α∫のthan in the original←is,-as)but the looseness unfortunately kills the
concise, compressed expression of the Latin. One might wonder again
whether they could not have said something like bu Wast and (buJ axas〃,
if not rVast and axas〃The sentence in lO.5-6 seems to be nearer to the
static indirect speech if anything, for if we change the subject, we get he
wat bcet he cefter axsaδ.
Most of Latin attributive participles cannot be translated aptly into Old
English participles, as Godden(1992:517)remarks:“Another problem
that writers faced when translating Latin prose was to find an equivalent
for constructions using adjectival phrases, headed by a participle or adjec-
tive, where English would more naturally use a subordinate clause.”
Whereas many of the c’rcumstantゴα’participles are preserved, e.g.
dたe〃5/cweδende, as we mentioned in 2.1.2.2. Therefore the addition of
relative pronouns/particles andわθ,s is inevitable in most medieval and
modern languages when attributive participles of Greek and Latin are
translated;hence the relative clause in 34.17-8
amo naufragum a fortuna deceptum,...
Ic lufigeレon forlidenan man 6e waesレurh ungelymp beswicen...
26
Rhetorical Ana1ysis of Historia.4pollonii Regis Tyri and Old English 4po〃onius(ゾ7ンre 27
was, however clumsy it may have sounded as an actual utterance, presum-
ably inevitable. It is a pity that this sentence is in the speech for
Arcestrate, when she confesses her love for Apollonius to her father. It
would be more tolerable had it been found in the narrative rather than in
the speech:5θo lufab bon/cor〃denan〃lan....This, however, does not
mean that the translator did not make any distinction between narrative
and dialogue. Ogawa(1991:61-2)classifies the entire subordinate clauses
in.4、ρ1「according to their syntactic features and Professor Ogawa,sstatis-
tics clearly demonstrate the difference of the two types. The translator did
try to distinguish narrative from dialogue but the inherent constraints of
his mother tongue forced him to add what he perhaps thought would be
inapPropriate in the speech.
Bur is not necessarily a bedroom and that is why a relative clause is
added to specify:
vigilans irrupit cubiculum filiae suae...。
he of slaepe awoc, he abraec into 6am bure par heo inne leeg....
(2.13-14)
The translator could have used bedcofa as ZEIfric,s gloss(bedcofa vel bur
cubた〃u〃1)or bedclyfa as inルlatt(alSCρソ6.6, dispensing with the
relative clause(11). More literal Oam bure of his dohtor or his do〃or bure
without a relative clause would not diminish the e丘bct of
homoeoprophoron in abrcec...伽rθ. We have a similar sequence of
words in 34.13-15:
rex solus intravit ad丘liam suam....
se cyng...eode ana into 6am bureレar his dohtor inne waes.._
We know伽r alone can be a bedroom. Arcestrate is Iying on her bed
because of her〃zalad’e d’a〃iour for Apollonius;we find just before in 30.
30 euid....〃lagisteろ...singularis cub’c漁〃 ’η〃o’5”~,’Lαrθow,加’
gαest Ou ana2 strangely with no word for the bedroom here. In 34.13-15,
the literal rendering,5θ(ッng eode’n to his dehter is probably impossible,
whereas’η〃o plus ad can be used with a destination of a person, another
example that demonstrates the flexibility of Latin as{弐καη2颪∬αcoη’uge
(3.3-4),This explains the translator,s addition of bur, but still there is no
need of adding a relative clause here;it could have been simply his do〃or
bure as we can surmise from such examples as gehyr binre(iohtor w〃1αη
27
28 Koichi NAKAMuRA
(desiとieriu〃1 natae tua¢ノ(34.17)or 8θ(ツng...〃θ〃iihteα1「cefnian h is
dohtor tearas(filiae suae lacrim as7(34.20-21). Or it may be that his
dohtor bur cannot mean“the bedroom where his daughter lay”but‘‘the
bedroom allotted to his daughter,,, the meanings of the genitive being
more limited in Old English.
Conclusion
(1)There are some examples where the Old English translator obviously
tried rhetorical rendering with success, using homoeoprophoron,
parhomoeon, homoioteleuton, chiasmus, polyptoton, paronomasia,
paromoiosis and epiphora.
(2)The translator seems to have deliberately avoided using words loaded
with Christian connotations for Latin words that express mundane
actlons.
(3)Rhetorical ellipses can be employed more often in the Latin than in the
Old English;they sometimes seem compulsory in the former.
(4)The Latin is flexible and condensed, particularly with the help of par-
ticiples just like most of the other works;hence frequent explanatory
translation of the Old English.
(5)The Old EngliSh tries to link clauses and sentences with every means,
θ.g. conjunctions and anaphoric pronouns, whereas the Latin dispenses
with such consideration.
Notes
Ithank Dr. John Scahill for giving me a copy of Raith(1956). I am
indebted to Mr. Hattori, Mr. Nishinarita, Mr. Omiya, Dr. Scahill, Mr.
Urata and Mr. Watanabe for the inspiration th6y gave me when we read
this work together.
(1)Alliteration is not confined to the Gefmanic, though it is the most
systematic and prevalent in that branch of Indo-European languages.
Gamkrelidze-Ivanov (i995:735-737) cites examples from Hittite,
Armenian and Vedic.
28
Rhetorical Analysis of Historia Aρo〃onii 1~egis 1ンr’and Old English・4po〃onius of Tyre 29
(2)Philoctetes, the son of Poias, begs Neoptolemus to take him back to
his own country after deserted for ten years on the island of Lemnos:
〃eδσo〃,πQδ∫αう70θZημδ∫iXEσ‘ou,τξrrvov,/πe‘σθη7‘.魍σ∈
76レασ‘,κα‘π∈(1(乃μ/&x〔~(をτωQ δ 7λ舜μωレ,xωλ6⊆.(Please!In the
name of Zeus himself, the protector of suppliants, my son, be
persuaded!Ifall on my knees before you, although I am a
powerless, lame, wretched man.)(Sophocles, Philoctetes 484-486)
One of Hercules, sons prostrates himself to his temporarily mad father,
begging not to kill him:
diθdr〃αδ’δτλ舜μωη6レασ・!幽πa・TQbs/z・・iπQδs 7e・e・・レ
)(∈fgα xafiδξρηレ βαλ山ア/;Ω φελτα7’,αゐδ〔£‘,μ舜 μ’&πoπ76‘レηむ∫,
π(をπ〔~’/σ6C eZμ‘,σδsπαftG’oゐ7δレEbQvσ06cesδ)㌧∈?s(But before
【that]the miserable【son】falls down on his knees before his father,
extending his hand to his beard and neck and said,“Oh, my dearest
father, don,t kill me!Iam yours, your child. You are not killing the
【child]of Eurystheus.)(Euripides, Mad Herc〃es 986-989)
(3)Caesar, Bellum Ga〃icum,127.1-2:
Heluetii omnium rerum inopia adducti legatos de deditione ad eum
miserunt. Qui cum eum in itinere conuenissent seque ad pedes
proiecissent supPliciterque locuti fientes pacem petissent, atque eos
in eo loco quo tum essent suum aduentum expectare iussisset,
paruerunt.(The Helvetii, driven by the entire destitution, sent depu-
ties to him in surrender. They encountered him on the way and pros-
trated themselves before his feet and supplicating asked for peace
with tears and he ordered them to wait for his return where they
were and they obeyed.)
(4)We use the following sigla:the Vespasian Psa〃er(A),伽Junius
Psa〃θr(B), the Cα〃ibridge Psa〃θr(C), the Roアal or Reg’us Psalter(D),
Eadwine’s Can terbUiツPsalter(E), the Sto we or Spel〃lan Psalter(F), the
レXite〃ius Psalter(G), the Tiberius、Psa〃er(H), the、乙a〃ibeth Psa〃er(1),
the A rundel Psalter(J), the SalsbUtツPsa〃er(K),’乃θBosworth Psalter
(L),the B〃ckling Psalter(M), and the Paris Psa〃er(P)(P 1:1-50.8, P2:
51.7-150.3).
(5)We should not perhaps include the following example here;the one
element which constitutes the alliteration does not exist either in RI or R2
0r C.C.C.318 but supplied by the editor fromδin order to match with
reo wlice:
29
30 Koichi NAKAMuRA
Nomen patris penitus periit in me(RI periit in me nomen patris, R2
nomen periit patris in me).
So61ice on me earmre is mines feeder nama reowlice forworden....
(5.4)
(6)Despite the Markisch (1899:62),s remark that“statt eines
Abstraktums h加fig das Konkretum gesetzt wird,”there is a contrary
example in which a concrete noun is turned into an abstract one:
cum omnium Ephesiorum gaudio et lacrimis cum marito et filia et
genero navem ascendit(R1,2 gaudio et lacrimis).
mid blisse and heofe ealreレare maeg6e on Efesum heo for mid hire
were and mid hire a6ume and mid hire dohtor....(38.18-19)
Lacrimis here is not tears of genuine sorrow as would accompany mourn-
ing, but is overlapped with the extremely joyful surprise that Apollonius
encountered his wife he had long believed to have been dead. It may be
that no Old English word can indicate such a complicated amalgam of
sorrow and joy;it seems that tear always indicates sorrow as it is. The
other heof is quite near in 38.1:θ’、ρergens’ηノ4θ9ツpti、ρartibus luxi
㎜C’〃1α朋‘5,’」F()r〃le Pa to Egipta lande/bowertene gear on heofe.
In 34.21 we have an ordinary tear:8θの2ng...ne〃zihte arrefnian his
dohtor tearas(tacrimas),...,so the translator,s choice of heo.プmust have
some motive behind it.
(7)It seems necessary’to convert gelimp into a verb:Secgeb pcet gelimpe
cer domesdcege on、bam nehstum tidum....(‘A New Version of the
Apocalypse of Thomas in Old English’,57 in Ang〃a 73,6-36)
(8)Examples S...Vdo occur in principal clauses. See Mitchell(1985:
§3914):“But it must be stressed that S...Vand at least some of its
variants-more work is needed here-are found in principal clauses and
simple sentences, both in those which are introduced by an adverb ele-
ment other than ne and in those which are not so introduced.”
(9)‘‘Die n廿chtern-sachliche Sprache der Fachschriftsteller(Cato, Gaius)
und der Historiker(Cees.,Sall.,Liv,,Tac.,auch noch Iust. al.)bevorzugt
im Hauptsatz, mehr noch im Nebensatz die E【nd]St[ellung】, so z. B.
Caes. Gall. II zu 84 bzw.93%.Eine Ausnahme bilden in klass. Zeit Varro
und Cic. mit im Durchschnitt nur 50%ESt....Ans Romanische mit
30
Rhetorical Analysis of H競or’α4ρo〃onii Regis Tyri and Old English/Apo〃onius of 7ン’θ 31
seiner obligatorischen Zwischenstellung...grenzen die Verhaltnisse bei
volkstUmliche Schriftstellern im SPatlatein, so in der Peregr、 Aeth.
[A etheriae peregrinatio ad loca sancta]mit nur 25%bzw.37%ESt.”
(10)If we classify them according to the grammatical categories, we have
nine infinitives, four preterite and three present forms.
(11)We have two examples of cubiculum in the Gospels:
Tu autem cum orabis, intra in cubiculum tuum:....
Du soレliceレonne bu 6e gebidde:gang intoレinum bedclyfan....
(Matt(WS()Pゾ6.6) ・
This cubiculum is for TatpLEi)o v“chamber, closet.”The reading in Liuzza
(1994)hedc勿fan is probably wrong, which cannot be found in BT or
BTC. The other one is in Luke(昭S(]pソ12.3:
quod in aurem locuti estis in cubiculis(ToTs 7’c)csLEtots), praedicabitur
in tectis.
レaet ge on earum spreecun on beddcofum bi6 on hrofum bodud....
Bibliography
Primary Sources
Goolden, Peter, ed. The Old English!lpo〃onius qブ乃lre. Oxford:Oxford
University Press,1958.
Liuzza, R. M.,ed. The Old Englishレ爾’oπq〃he Gospels. EETS 304. Oxford:
Oxford University Press,1994.
Raith, Josef, ed. D’θα〃-und mittelenglischen Apo〃onius-Bruchstdicke mid dem
Text der Historia /IPO”onii nach der englischen Handschriftθngruppe.
MUnchen:Max Hueber,1956.Riese, A., ed. Historia.Apo〃onii Regis 7ンri. Stuttgart:Teubner,1893.
Thorpe, Benj amin, ed. The/A nglo-Saxon Version q〃he Stoiッqブノlpollonius qブ
乃lre・Uρon隔’Cゐ制吸)unde(〃加P1¢y qプPericles, A ttributed to Shakespeare∫
fro〃2αルIS.’η疏θL’わrα〃qプσσC. Cα〃か’dge, with・a甜eral Translation,6…
C.London:John and Arthur Arch,1834.
Vleeskruyer, R., ed. The Lヴfe qプSain t Chad.°αη Old Eng’ish Ho〃1めノ.
Amsterdam:North-Holland Publishing Company,1953.Wildhagen, Kar1, ed.Der Cambridger、融α1’θ7価. Ff.1.23 Universめ, Libr. Cam-
bridge7之U〃2 ersten Male herau5gegeわen〃1”besonderer Benicksicht’gung des
latein ischen Textes. Hamburg:Verlag von Henri Grand,1910.
31
32 Koichi NAKAMuRA
Secondary Sources
Archibald, Elizabeth.ノlpo〃onius qプTyre.・Medieval and Rε〃α’∬ance Themes
and Variations. Cambridge:D. S. Brewer,1991.
Dupriez, Bernard.ノ1 Dict’onaノッofLiteraiッDevices. Translated and Adapted by
Albert W. Halshall. Hemel Hempstead:Harvester Wheatsheaf,1991.
Fontanier, Pierre. Lθ∫ノigures du discours.°〃ianuel classique pour 1’4如de des
trouPes ou{ガ6〃lents de la science du sens des〃10ts.1821-1830;rpt. Paris:
Flammarion,1968.
Galnkrelidze, Thomas V. and Vj a6eslav V. Ivanov. Indo-European and the
Indo-Euroρeans. Berlin:Mouton de Gruyter,1995.
Godden, Malcolm R.,“Literary Language”The Cambridge Histotッqプthe English Language.°レ’olume L’The Beginnings to 1066. Ed. Richarq M. Hogg.
Cambridge:CUP,1992.
KnapPe, Gabriele. Tra(ガ”o刀der〃a∬ischen Rhetorik im angelsdichsischen
England. Heidelberg:Carl Winter,1996.
Lanham, Richard A.ノ1.肋雇1競qブ、Rhetorica’Te〃ns. Second Edition. Berkeley
and Los Angels:University of California Press,1991.
Lausberg, Heinrich.、Handbuch der.Rhetorischen. Eine Grundlegung der Literaturwi,∬enschaft. MUnchen,1960;3rd ed. Stuttgart:Franz Steiner Ver-
lag,1990.
Leumann, M., J.B. Ho缶nann and A. Szantyr, Lateinische Grammatik. Zweiter
Ba〃d’Syntax und 3〃istik. Verbesserter 1>々ckdruck der 1965 erschienenen
ersten.4姻σge. M廿nchen:C.H.Beck,1972
Markisch, Robert. Die a〃englische Bearbeitung der Erzdh伽g voη.4po〃onius
yo〃7ンrus. Grammatik und lateinischer Text. Palaestra. VI. Berlin:Mayer&
Mnller,1899.
Mitchell, Bruce. Old English Syntax. Oxford:Clarendon,1985.
Ogawa, Hiroshi.‘‘Stylistic Features of Old English、Apo〃onius of 7ンre.”Poθ”ca,
34,(1991),57-74.
Wine, Joseph D.」Figurat’ve La〃g㍑αge l〃()ynewulf;・Defihing!卸θc孟3 qブa poetic
3ζア’θ.New York:Peter Lang,1993.
Yamanouchi, Kazuyoshi.【“Some Notes on Fyrenfut as an Old English Equiva-
lent for Latin Pθc(rato〆’】, Studies in Eng’ish Philologツ加H∂nour of Sh igeru
Ono. Tokyo:Nan,un-Do,1990.
Key words: Old English, Latin, Aρotlonius of Tyre, rhetoric, figure
32