Department of Humanities,
March 3-4, 2016
«Cuatro días se
le pasaron en imaginar qué nombre le pondría».
Cervantes, Don Quijote
Since their appearance, studies in
onomastics have contributed to a deeper comprehension of texts, authors and
contexts, thanks to their tight links with philology, historical linguistics
and glottology. For example, the use of archaic forms crystallized in toponyms
or anthroponyms is a key-element when it comes to establish relevant
chronological issues regarding vernacular languages and varieties. In
literature, one can observe three main options of dealing with proper nouns,
sometimes overlapping in the same work: reticence, neutrality, and evident
semanticity. When adopting a reticent strategy, the author is to choose between
two different paths. One is that of anonymity, for both characters and settings
(for example, the protagonist of Pirandello’s Enrico IV, or the unnamed
locations of Kafka’s Process). Otherwise, the author might choose to screen or
mask real identities through senhal, anagrams or conspicuous transformations
(as Sciascia does with Regalpetra, standing for the real Racalmuto).
The second
option, that of neutrality, consists in the preference for “common” nouns as
means to portray both everymen or unconventional characters - such as
Fielding’s Tom Jones or Tozzi’s Pietro Rosi; the same can be said for cities
and countries actually existing. Finally, some names display a clear semantic
depth, even though their meaning is left to the reader’s hypothesis: it is the
case of Joyce’s Dedalus, Gadda’s Maradagàl, Márquez’ Macondo.
A specific case
of study is the use of proper nouns as expression of disapproval or even
condemnation - an attitude that might deeply influence the very same nature of
the text. This kind of works, addressing specific individuals with specific
names, can be either unpublished and not circulating (as is the case of
Ariosto’s Satire), or published but not clearly naming the responsible (as
Pasolini’s article about massacres in 1974).
Another area of research concerns
common nouns. These latter can suggest new ideas about an author’s poetics
(grounding on the different nuances of a same key-word) or about cultural
history: an entire Weltanschauung can be represented by abstract nouns such as
‘gentilezza’, ‘classe’ or ‘nazione’. Neologisms and «lost words», as they are
called by Beccaria in his I nomi del mondo, belong to the same field.
Obviously, nouns are held to be capable of conveying further meanings about the
characters they identify since classical literature. Thus, Telemachos is «he
who fights from the distance», Phrasikleia, the well-known character of
epigrams, is «she who shows the kleos», and the same can be said for several
characters of Greek and Latin comedies.
Intersections between onomastics,
comparative literature and translation studies are another profitable area of
interest, for they allow to compare Italian cases with European tendencies and
to face issues such as the loss of meanings (for example, The Importance of
Being Earnest is sometimes translated as L’importanza di chiamarsi Franco).
Onomastics’ studies can also involve inquiries on eteronyms (Pessoa’s ones are
renowned) and pseudonyms. In such cases, different names can lead to
nonequivalent works and creative attitudes, but they can also affect the
relationship between author and text, or author and reader. The conference aims
at gathering Ph.D. students and young researchers (who have completed their
Ph.D. in the last 5 years) working in the fields of Classics, Language and
Literatures, Linguistics and Comparative Studies. 20 minute talks can be given
in either Italian or English. By the end of 2016 the proceedings will be
published online by Edizioni Ca’ Foscari.
Proposers are invited to submit:
- an
anonymous abstract (500 words max);
- short bio-bibliographical note (500 words
max).
Both files shall be sent to onomastica.cafoscari@gmail.com before January
17th, 2016. Communication of acceptance will be delivered via email on January
25 th, 2016.
No comments:
Post a Comment