UZH-Logo

Maintenance Infos

Rhetorics of authority: Leviticus and the Analects compared


Barden, G; Weber, R (2010). Rhetorics of authority: Leviticus and the Analects compared. Asiatische Studien / Études Asiatiques, 64(1):173-240.

Abstract

The biblical text Leviticus and the Confucian Analects might appear as neither an obvious nor a very promising choice for a comparative philosophical exercise. To be sure, both texts now and then do share some similarity in matter. But such similarity in matter upon closer examination and contextualisation frequently turns out to be undermined by overt differences which call into
question the comparative effort. Our comparison therefore proceeds from a different angle and is
motivated by an asserted similarity in rhetoric, by which we mean to claim no more than that both
texts record situations in which someone speaks to someone else. Moreover, there is a dominant
speaker in each text, the Lord and the Master respectively, whose words seem to carry authority.
What kind of authority is concerned in each case it is the aim of this paper to investigate. We do so
by first giving an account of what philological and historical research tells us about these texts in
order to better understand the task and complexities with which translators were and still are grappling when bringing these texts into the English language. Our main concern then is with a philosophical investigation into the rhetorics of authority as it presents itself to us in standard and influential English translations of Leviticus and the Analects. In the end, we offer some salient comparisons of the two texts as they appear to each author of this article. This will allow the comparison to arise in the eyes of our readers, whose sight quite naturally will be different from ours.

The biblical text Leviticus and the Confucian Analects might appear as neither an obvious nor a very promising choice for a comparative philosophical exercise. To be sure, both texts now and then do share some similarity in matter. But such similarity in matter upon closer examination and contextualisation frequently turns out to be undermined by overt differences which call into
question the comparative effort. Our comparison therefore proceeds from a different angle and is
motivated by an asserted similarity in rhetoric, by which we mean to claim no more than that both
texts record situations in which someone speaks to someone else. Moreover, there is a dominant
speaker in each text, the Lord and the Master respectively, whose words seem to carry authority.
What kind of authority is concerned in each case it is the aim of this paper to investigate. We do so
by first giving an account of what philological and historical research tells us about these texts in
order to better understand the task and complexities with which translators were and still are grappling when bringing these texts into the English language. Our main concern then is with a philosophical investigation into the rhetorics of authority as it presents itself to us in standard and influential English translations of Leviticus and the Analects. In the end, we offer some salient comparisons of the two texts as they appear to each author of this article. This will allow the comparison to arise in the eyes of our readers, whose sight quite naturally will be different from ours.

Downloads

375 downloads since deposited on 26 May 2010
68 downloads since 12 months
Detailed statistics

Additional indexing

Item Type:Journal Article, refereed, original work
Communities & Collections:08 University Research Priority Programs > Asia and Europe
Journals > Asiatische Studien / Études Asiatiques > Archive > 64 (2010) > 1
Dewey Decimal Classification:950 History of Asia
180 Ancient, medieval & eastern philosophy
Language:English
Date:2010
Deposited On:26 May 2010 18:33
Last Modified:05 Apr 2016 14:08
Publisher:Schweizerische Asiengesellschaft / Verlag Peter Lang
ISSN:0004-4717
Permanent URL: http://doi.org/10.5167/uzh-34225

Download

[img]
Preview
Filetype: PDF
Size: 1MB

TrendTerms

TrendTerms displays relevant terms of the abstract of this publication and related documents on a map. The terms and their relations were extracted from ZORA using word statistics. Their timelines are taken from ZORA as well. The bubble size of a term is proportional to the number of documents where the term occurs. Red, orange, yellow and green colors are used for terms that occur in the current document; red indicates high interlinkedness of a term with other terms, orange, yellow and green decreasing interlinkedness. Blue is used for terms that have a relation with the terms in this document, but occur in other documents.
You can navigate and zoom the map. Mouse-hovering a term displays its timeline, clicking it yields the associated documents.

Author Collaborations