269328

7/28/2019 269328

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/269328 1/3

Plato: "Theaetetus" by John McDowellReview by: Rosamond Kent SpragueClassical Philology, Vol. 73, No. 1 (Jan., 1978), pp. 79-80Published by: The University of Chicago Press

Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/269328 .

Accessed: 12/06/2013 09:32

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .

http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

.JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of

content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms

of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

.

The University of Chicago Press is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to

Classical Philology.

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded from 200.26.133.57 on Wed, 12 Jun 2013 09:32:40 AMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=ucpress

http://www.jstor.org/stable/269328?origin=JSTOR-pdf






http://www.jstor.org/stable/269328?origin=JSTOR-pdf

http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=ucpress

7/28/2019 269328


BOOK REVIEWS 79

Entwicklungsgeschichtef Herodotus' nterests, and concludes hat the visit could haveoccurredany time between the Battle of Papremis ca. 459) and ca. 430. L.'s argumentthat Herodotusdid indeedvisit UpperEgypt (pp.73-75) is basednot on evidencebut onan ad hominem lea: "It is surely ncredible hat sucha man wouldtell a seriesof bare-faced lies. If he said he went to Upper Egypt, he went!" (p. 75). The essentialpoint isthat, whetheror not Herodotus raveledsouth of the Fayyum, such travelscontributedlittle or nothingto Book 2. Severalof the errors n Book 2, L. finds(pp. 149-53), seem tobe the resultof Herodotus'penchantfor schematization: he contrastof EgyptianandGreekcustoms(2. 35-36), the three grades of mummification 2. 86-89), the Labyrinth(2. 148).AlthoughI cannot agreewith all of L.'s commentson Herodotus' hronologicalinformation,his generalconclusion p. 193) is well supported:"The two essentialpointsto grasp about Herodotuschronographusre, first, that a well articulatedchronologicalframework ertainly ies beneaththe Historiesand, second, that his rolein making t isalmost certainlysecondary."

RobertDrews

VanderbiltUniversity

Plato: "Theaetetus."Translated with Notes by JOHN MCDOWELL. larendonPlato Series. Oxford: Clarendon Press; New York: Oxford University Press,1973. Pp. vi + 264. $16.00.

The Clarendon Aristotle for philosophers is now joined by a Clarendon Plato;

Mr. McDowell's Theaetetus s the first in this new series. The translation is ac-companied by a very substantial set of notes, many of which are really shortessays. In this journal I judge it appropriate to devote my space to comments onthe translation.

One general point about the book (and, in prospect, about the series) disturbsme considerably. Is there really a way of translating Plato for philosophersasopposed to some other group of readers?M.'s concept of his task involves a system-atic flattening of Plato's style. Long sentences are almost invariably broken up,and the order of clauses is frequently reversed. Questions tend to become state-

ments. Colorful verbs become pale. The English is sometimes so literal as to beobscure-and so forth. There seems to me to be a wrong approach to Plato here,a notion that his thinking can be made to emerge bright and clear if we can onlyrid ourselves of some of his more fanciful ways of expressingit. If this is really thebasic idea behind the Clarendon series, then I view the series with some alarm.A Plato for philosophers (Oxfordphilosophers?) could be a very limited and evenmisleading Plato.

143C2-3:"something bouthimself"and "something boutthe person. ." areincorrect.143D1: on as masculine psetstheconnectionwithtain D2. 143E1: aallameans"other,"

not "several." 47B1:to introduce"name"heretakesawayfromthe muchmoregeneralsense of onoma n B2. 148D2:prothumetis separated romlabein ogon,and ton allonappearsto be misunderstood. 5OA8: he contrast betweentosouton nd elatton s notbroughtout sufficiently.15OB3: what'strueand what isn't"obscures eference o whatprecedes.15OC6: he omissionof oneidizousins acceptable n termsof sense but doesalter the style. 150D5:tois alloismeans"to others,"not "to everyoneelse" (cf. 150E7).151E2: "nothing but" should be "nothingother than." 151E4: "Well done" is weakhere.151E7:not "yousay knowledges perception,"but "perception, ou say, is knowl-





7/28/2019 269328


80 BOOKREVIEWS

edge." 151E8: "ordinary"is not the right sense for phaulonhere. 152C5: "as if it's knowl-

edge" is incorrect for hos efisteme ousa. 152C8: "by the Graces" is omitted; this type of

omission is announced as a general policy. 152C9: the notion of riddling in einixato should

be brought out. 153E2: en genesei seems to be omitted. 153C3-4: the contrast between

hemiolious and hemiseis is better shown by Cornford and Fowler ("half as many again"

and "half as many"). 156D1-2: the second houtode should not be omitted. 157A3: the

translation misses kai . .. kai. 158B5: toionde s not brought out. 161D4: the "he" is slightly

ambiguous. 162C7: "No, I don't" is too weak. 162D3: "debating-points" is not right for

demegorias. 165D2: the omission of ei impedes the flow of the sentence. 166B6: the shift

from "someone" to "anyone" confuses the sense. 167B1-3: the readings ponerai and

chrestei are probably right. 167D5: the full sense of antidiexelthon is not brought out.

167E4-5: the notion of time here is misleading. 168B3: I think sunkatheisimplies mental,

rather than physical, activity. 168C2: the suggestion of purpose is misleading. 170B1:

not "because they're superior precisely in respect of knowledge" but "although they are

not superior in anything except knowledge." 171A6ff.: "Protagoras agrees that everyone

has in his judgments the things that are" is very unclear; the whole long sentence needs

to be recast. 172D9: tou ontos means "the truth." 173D4: spoudai, rather than hetairion,

is parallel with sunodoi, etc. 173D5: komoi should be something more like "revels." 173E1:

"pints" would be better than "drops" for choes. 174D6: M.'s "having got a high yield" is

distinctly better than keeping to the literal meaning, "to squeeze milk out of," which

does not make much sense of suboten. 174E1: "as he is" is ambiguous. 175B9 ff.: the

suspense in Plato's long sentence is removed by reordering and breaking up. 176A7: needs

a "but" (de). 176D1: "mechanical" is not quite right for banausoi. 176E3: not "there are

patterns," but "of the patterns which are. . ." 178B6: "authority" is slightly misleading

for kriterion.179A1: M. wishes to read de for me but fails to translate accordingly. 179A2:

esesthai te kai doxein are omitted. 179D8: choregousi s not brought out. 179E4: autois is

not translated. 180A4: "enigmatic little expressions" is good here, as is "transfixed by

another novel set of metaphors" in A6. 180C2: "wherever each one happens to draw his

inspiration from" is literal but awkward. 18OE1: M. says that hoion merely introduces

the Parmenides line, but then goes on to include it in his translation of the quotation.

181D1: ek should be "from," not "instead of." 183B4: the textual note is not clear. M.

says he is retaining oud' houtos with W and the OCT, but he is already using the OCT.

Nothing is said about the bracketed d' houtosin B5. 183E5: the pun on hena onta is well

brought out. 184A5: epeiskomazontoncouldbe

stronger.186B6: hoti is more

likelyto mean

"that" than "what." 186C1-2: I doubt if pathematashould be made the object. It would

also be better to retain the interrogative form and not to break up the sentence so much.

187D6: M. appears to be taking tina as ti. 188D3: "has in his judgment about anything

the things which are not" displays the same awkwardness as noted at 171A9 (cf. 188D9

and 189A6, 8). 190E9: "while" is slightly ambiguous. 195D6-7: indefinite article seems

needed. 196C6: "get into falsehood" is awkward; "be deceived"? 199C1: better to keep

doxan singular. 201B1-2: aposteroumenoiand biazomenoi seem changes for the better.

202A3-4: the quotation marks of the OCT would be of use as at 205C7-8. 204A1: I am

not sure it was a good idea to change "syllable" to "complex" and "letters" to "elements"

just here. 205A6: certainlya

dark saying; perhapsFowler is most successful with "which

have become identical simultaneously and for the same reason." 205B2: M. writes "the

same as them." 205D1: to for tou improves the sense. 208A9: "he has the way to go through

it" sounds odd. Cf. B5 and C6. 209B7-8: "remotest peasant in Asia" doesn't strike the

right note of contempt. 210D3-4: why shift the order of the final sentence?

Rosamond Kent Sprague

University of South Carolina





Documents

269328