The language strategy of Galileo Galilei around two dialogue works

伽利略围绕两部对话作品的语言策略

• 批准号: 13610646
• 负责人: KOBAYASHI Mitsuru
• 金额: $ 1.86万
• 依托单位: Kyoto Sangyo University
• 依托单位国家: 日本
• 项目类别: Grant-in-Aid for Scientific Research (C)
• 财政年份: 2001
• 资助国家: 日本
• 起止时间: 2001 至 2003
• 项目状态: 已结题
• 来源: https://kaken.nii.ac.jp/grant/KAKENHI-PROJECT-13610646/
• 关键词: Galileo; dialogue

I did a detailed analysis about Galileo's dialogue form, specially around "Dialogue Concerning the Two Chief World Systems"First, there is a following expression about the theatrical characteristics of this work a character says that he himself proceeds the argument as an existence like an actor.This proves that characters themselves just play each part (Aristotle school or Copernicus school), with explaining that this work is a thing in real imagination, and with inviting a reader to enjoy it as such a thing.And in this work, generally, arguments proceed in the direction where Simplicio of Aristotle side is finally made to n notice that his own opinion contradicts. Galileo was probably conscious of the Dialogues of Plato, in opposition to Aristotles treatise form.Then, arguments often digress and reach the topic that there is no relationship very much with the main subject.In these cases, Galileo uses it as an opportunity to announce a theme (for example, about the infinity) that he only hit upon but hasn't develop fully yet. It is a function typical of the dialogue form. And then, Galileo sometimes mentions the attitude of the scholar to science while argument is being developed. This plays the part to tighten the whole flow of the work.

首先，关于这部作品的戏剧性特征，有这样一个表述：一个人物说他自己就像一个演员一样作为一个存在来进行论证，这证明了人物本身只是扮演着每个角色（亚里士多德学派或哥白尼学派），解释这部作品是真实的想象中的东西，并邀请读者把它当作这样的东西来欣赏。而在这部作品中，一般来说，争论朝着亚里士多德的辛普利西奥最终注意到他自己的观点自相矛盾的方向进行。伽利略可能意识到了柏拉图的对话录，与亚里士多德的论文形式相反。然后，争论经常偏离主题，并达到与主题没有太大关系的主题。在这些情况下，伽利略将其作为一个机会来宣布一个主题（例如，关于无限），他只是偶然发现，但还没有充分发展。这是对话形式的典型功能。然后，伽利略有时会提到在论证发展的过程中，学者对科学的态度。这起到了收紧整个工作流程的作用。