Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-rdxmf Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-22T23:50:19.576Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Tropes and Topics in Scientific Discourse: Galileo's De Motu

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  26 September 2008

Ofer Gal
Ofer Gal
Affiliation:
Department of History and Philosophy of Science University of Pittsburgh
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

This paper contains two main sections. In the first I suggest a mechanism of interpretation, based on a distinction between two aspects of meaning, analyzed using two kinds of rhetorical-poetical constructions: tropes to explore the linguistic relations—metaphors, metonyms, synecdoches, etc.—that endow terms with content, and topics to account for the structuring function of key expressions, which enables the recognition and adjudication of phrases, arguments, texts, genres, etc. In the second section I substantiate my claims by demonstrating how new light is shed on Galileo Galilei's neglected and obscure De Motu if these two aspects of the meaning of its central theoretical terms are taken into consideration; interpreted through this approach it is revealed as a text revolutionary in its ideas, while the communicative efficacy of its continuous use of the traditional terminology is unveiled.

Type
Article
Information
Science in Context , Volume 7 , Issue 1 , Spring 1994 , pp. 25 - 52
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1994

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Aristotle, . 1928. The Works of Aristotle. Edited by Ross, W. D.. London: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Austin, J. L. 1962. How to Do Things with Words. The William James Lectures, 1955. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University PressGoogle Scholar
Bacon, F. 1905. The Philosophical Works. Translated by Ellis, R. and Spedding, J. L., edited by J. M. Robertson. London: Routledge and Sons.Google Scholar
Briggs, J. C. 1989. Francis Bacon and the Rhetoric of Nature. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Burke, K. 1945. A Grammar of Motives. New York: Braziller.Google Scholar
Drake, S., and Drabkin, I. E.. 1960. Galileo Galileion Motion and on Mechanics. Madison: University of Wisconsin Press.Google Scholar
Gal, O. Forthcoming. “Rorty and Hesse on Metaphor: Rhetoric in Contemporary Philosophy.” Journal of Speculative Philosophy.Google Scholar
Galilei, Galileo. [1890] 1968. Le Opere, vol. 1. Edited by Favaro, A.. Florence: G. Barbera.Google Scholar
Hesse, M. B. 1974. The Structure of Scientific Inference. London: Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hesse, M. B. 1988. “The Cognitive Claims of Metaphor.” Journal of Speculative Philosophy 2(1).Google Scholar
Hesse, M., and Rorty, R.. 1987. “Unfamiliar Noises.” Aristotelian Society Supplement, no. 61: 283–311.Google Scholar
Koyré, A. [1939] 1978. Galileo Studies. Translated by Mepham, J.. Atlantic Highlands, N. J.: Humanities Press.Google Scholar
Putnam, H. 1975. “The Meaning of ‘Meaning“.” In Mind, Language and Reality (Philosophical Works, vol. 2), 215–71. London: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ricoeur, P. 1978. The Rule of Metaphor. Translated by Czerny, R.. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul.Google Scholar
Rossi, P. 1968. Francis Bacon: From Magic to Science. Translated by Rabinovitch, S.. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul.Google Scholar
Vickers, B. 1988. In Defence of Rhetoric. Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
Wallace, K. R. 1943. Francis Bacon on Communication and Rhetoric. Chapel Hill, N.C.: University of North Carolina Press.Google Scholar
Wallace, W. A. 1984. Galileo and His Sources. Princeton: Princeton University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Whately, R. 1963. Elements of Rhetoric. Edited by Douglas, E.. Carbondale: Southern Illinois University Press.Google Scholar
White, H. 1978. Tropics of Discourse. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar