Full-text resources of CEJSH and other databases are now available in the new Library of Science.
Visit https://bibliotekanauki.pl

Results found: 4

first rewind previous Page / 1 next fast forward last

Search results

Search:
in the keywords:  Berman
help Sort By:

help Limit search:
first rewind previous Page / 1 next fast forward last
EN
he text discusses a monograph by Piotr Rypson about Mieczysław Berman. When we consider Czerwony monter [The Red Assembler], however, we need to refer to a concept that is closely akin, namely, Andrzej Leder’s take on revolution. What is underscored here is Berman’s composite photographs since, as the author of this discussion believes and expands upon in her text – they depict most accurately the times of the photo designer’s life. He is considered the creator of the communist propaganda’s graphical language. And that is probably why a considerable period has had to elapse before he became again considered “worthy” of the scholarly interest. It seems, in this day and age, important to reconsider the works of this world-renown “assembler” of red propaganda, merely in order to trace the remnants of his style in the graphic-design culture of today.
EN
The text discusses a monograph by Piotr Rypson about Mieczysław Berman. When we consider Czerwony monter [The Red Assembler], however, we need to refer to a concept that is closely akin, namely, Andrzej Leder’s take on revolution. What is underscored here is Berman’s composite photographs since, as the author of this discussion believes and expands upon in her text – they depict most accurately the times of the photo designer’s life. He is considered the creator of the communist propaganda’s graphical language. And that is probably why a considerable period has had to elapse before he became again considered “worthy” of the scholarly interest. It seems, in this day and age, important to reconsider the works of this world-renown “assembler” of red propaganda, merely in order to trace the remnants of his style in the graphic-design culture of today.
Translationes
|
2010
|
vol. 2
|
issue 1
EN
From a debate started by Charles Le Blanc in his book Le Complexe d’Hermès against translation study theories, the author reviews three kinds of criticism - the theoretical scope of translation studies, the figure of the Other, and the role of Bildung - each time returning to the texts written by Antoine Berman in response to Le Blanc’s criticism. It is then unveiled that in this polemic one can find a work close in spirit to that of German Romantics and an invitation to continue reflection beyond the strict debate on translation to bring it to “what society is made of”.
FR
À partir d’un débat commencé par Charles Le Blanc dans son livre Le Complexe d’Hermès contre les théories traductologiques, l’auteur passe en revue trois types de critique - la portée théorique de la traductologie, la figure de l’Autre et le rôle de la Bildung - pour à chaque fois revenir aux textes d’Antoine Berman et répondre aux critiques de Le Blanc. Se dévoile alors dans cette polémique un travail de l’esprit proche de celui à l’oeuvre chez les romantiques allemands et une invitation à continuer la réflexion au-delà du débat sur la traduction pour la porter sur « ce qui fait société ».
PL
Wśród historyków prawa istnieje przeświadczenie, że w Europie istnieje dość jednolita tradycja prawna. To przekonanie o jednolitości tradycji wynika z badań nad recepcją prawa rzymskiego przez różne kraje Europy i przyjęcie prawa rzymskiego jako podstawy dla prawa kanonicznego. Prawo rzymskie uważane jest zatem za faktyczny, historyczny fundament różnych porządków prawnych. W tym sensie, prawo rzymskie przejmuje funkcję, przypisywaną mu już w średniowieczu, ratio scripta, zbliżoną w treści do funkcji prawa natury. Co więcej, odwoływanie się do jednolitej tradycji prawnej, prowadzić może do wyrażania anachronicznych opinii o sytuacji politycznej w Europie. W artykule stawiam tezę, że prawo rzymskie nie powinno stanowić odpowiedniego punktu odniesienia dla budowania porządku prawnego w Europie, mimo oczywistych powodów, dla których mogłoby nim być.
EN
Some legal historians believe that there is a fairly uniform legal tradition in Europe. That conviction is brought about by the research of Roman law’s reception in different countries and its function for canon law. Hence, Roman law is considered to be an actual, historical foundations of different legal orders. In that sense, Roman law takes over a function, already attributed to it in Middle Ages, of ratio scripta. In content it is similar to natural law. What is more, constant reference to the uniform legal tradition can lead to anachronistic opinions on political situation in Europe. In the article I venture an opinion that Roman law should not be a valid reference point for a construction of legal order in Europe – despite the obvious reasons why it could be.
first rewind previous Page / 1 next fast forward last
JavaScript is turned off in your web browser. Turn it on to take full advantage of this site, then refresh the page.