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

Results found: 6

first rewind previous Page / 1 next fast forward last

Search results

Search:
in the keywords:  rainbow
help Sort By:

help Limit search:
first rewind previous Page / 1 next fast forward last
1
Content available remote

Амбивалентная природа радуги в поверьях Центральной России

100%
Добровольская В. Е.
Etnolingwistyka. Problemy Języka i Kultury
|
2011
|
vol. 23
205-216
PL
W artykule przedstawiono eufemistycznie nazwy tęczy funkcjonujące w rejonie włodzimierskim. Stwierdzono, że wiele z tych nazw zawiera komponenty odbijające pozytywne cechy i konotacje tęczy, podczas gdy inne nazwy dla tego samego zjawiska oddają jego naturę w potocznym myśleniu niebezpieczną i szkodliwą. O ile w pozytywnym aspekcie tęcza jest tylko atrybutem jakiejś osoby boskiej lub świętej, o tyle negatywne cechy tęczy mogą mieć charakter demoniczny. Autorka porównuje miejsca, gdzie różne nazwy są utrwalone, i stwierdza, że dystrybucja pewnych terminów współgra z obszarem funkcjonowania pewnych wątków z legend o tęczy. Stwierdzona ambiwalencja tęczy jest raczej późna. W czasach przedchrześcijańskich była wiązana z negatywnie wartościowanymi demonami i miała swoje zaplecze mitologiczne, zaś pozytywne konotacje tęczy są związane z mitologią chrześcijańską, w której tęcza jest traktowana jako atrybut Boga, Jego Matki i świętych.
EN
The author explores the euphemistic names for the rainbow in the Vladimir area, Russia. It is noted that many of these names include components reflecting positive features and connotations of the rainbow, while other names point to the harmful and dangerous nature of the rainbow in the people’s colloquial understanding. While in its positive form the rainbow is only an attribute of a saint person, as a negative object the rainbow can be a powerful demonic being. The author compares places where various names for the rainbow are used and concludes that the distribution of a certain term substantially coincides with the existence of specific types of legends about the rainbow. The ambivalence of the rainbow in traditional culture came rather late: in pre-Christian times, it was regarded as a negative demonic being (and as an element of the system of associations linked to the “basic myth”), while all positive connotations of the rainbow are linked with Christian mythology and treat the rainbow not as an independent being but as an attribute and property of God, His Mother, angels and saints.
2
Publication available in full text mode
Content available

On Suprasubjective Existence in Mathematics

100%
Krajewski S.
Studia Semiotyczne
|
2018
|
vol. 32
|
issue 2
75-86
EN
The professional mathematician is a Platonist with regard to the existence of mathematical entities, but, if pressed to tell what kind of existence they have, he hides behind a formalist approach. In order to take both attitudes into account in a possibly serious way, the concept of suprasubjective existence is proposed. It involves intersubjective existence, plus a stress on objectivity devoid of actual objects. The idea is illustrated, following William Byers, by the phenomenon of the rainbow: it is not an object but can be said to possess a subjective objectivity.
3

Lustrzane odbicia

100%
Skrzynecka J.
Symbolae Philologorum Posnaniensium Graecae et Latinae
|
2012
|
vol. 22
|
issue 2
75-90
EN
In 'Natural Question' 1 Seneca presents the survey of the rainbow theories and declares himself in favour of the mirror theory drawn from Posidonius. He pronounces the rainbow to be the reflection of the sun in a moist, hollow cloud. This reflection is distorted due to the defectiveness of the natural mirror which is the above mentioned cloud. The scientific argument in Natural Question 1 is closed by the tale about Hostius Quadra, a sexual deviant who sees pleasures in watching his bodily acts in magnifying mirrors. The link between the scientific discourse and the Hostius episode is supplied by the theme of the rainbow or precisely the mirror and its wrong application by humans. Thus Seneca refers the catoptrical inquiry in the nature to the debate over the moral condition of the Roman society.
LA
In primo libro 'Naturalium Quaestionum' imprimis, quemadmodum arcus fiat, a Seneca quaeritur. Omnis inquisitio, quae ad arcum pertineat, in partes tres dividi posse videtur. Primum, quae ab aliis proposita sunt, exponit, deinde collocutoribus falsis introductis superiora proposita refellit, denique magna cum subtiliate Posidonii opinionem, cui assentitur, exprimit. Illud dubium nulli esse posse censet, quin arcus speculari ratione fiat. Qui visus igitur non ob aliam causam in caelo fit, quam quia roscida concavaque nubes, cui forma pilae sectae est, speculi ratione imaginem solis reddit. Inter argumenta a scriptore ponitur arcus excitari non posse nisi contra solem. Praeterea arcus numquam dimidio circulo maior est, eoque minor quo altior sol est. Colores autem, quibus arcus depingitur, sole efficiuntur, sed cavendum ne illi, quibus species coloris sit, veri habeantur. Quam ob rem philosophus arcum caducam fugacemque effigiem et sine re similitudinem iudicat, quod in arcu nihil corporis certi subest, imago autem, quam in caelo videmus, fallacia speculi est. Seneca tractatis speculis naturalibus, quibus phaenomena admirari possumus, paulum a proposito aberrat, ut de Hostio Quadra, speculorum amatore, fabellam narret. Iste admissarius coitibus spectandis in speculis, quae reddentia imagines longe maiores fecerat, delectatus est. Sed quamvis uterque admirabiliter instrumentum inquisitionis speculum fecerit, Hostius tamen omnibus partibus ab philosopho differt. Quo sequitur, ut speculo, beneficio a natura dato, non solum qui et se ipsos et phaenomena cognituri sint, sed etiam qui voluptatibus diffluant utantur. Postremis verbis scriptor acerbe affirmat vitia hominum in processu esse, quod nequitas undique diffundat. Seneca ergo ad hominum mores etiam inquisitionem naturalium quaestionum refert.
4
Publication available in full text mode
Content available

O retorycznych aspektach tęczy: od konstruowania tożsamości do strategii marketingowej

100%
Miłkowska-Samul K.
Nowoczesne Systemy Zarządzania
|
2023
|
vol. 18
|
issue 1
61-76
EN
The aim of this paper is to analyze the use of the rainbow motif on the elements of material reality that surrounds us, such as clothes, accessories, furniture, decorations, but most of all in case of marketing communication of companies and brands. This analysis is based on the belief that things are important factors shaping social reality, which stems from Bruno Latour’s actor-network theory. Material products that transmit the rainbow motif sometimes acquire rhetorical value when the rainbow as a symbol becomes a means of persuasion. These situations, especially the use of the rainbow as a symbol of LGBTQ+ communities to shape the brand image, known as rainbow capitalism and rainbow washing, will be examined in this paper with the help of rhetorical concepts, especially from the point of view of visual rhetoric. This is because persuasion in this case does not take place through the verbal code, but the visual one. Rhetorical means such as the concept of identification and two elements from the triad of persuasive devices: ethos and pathos, will be used to explain these phenomena. The distinction between persuasion and manipulation will also prove useful in the analysis of the phenomenon discussed.
PL
Celem niniejszego artykułu jest zaprezentowanie użycia motywu tęczy na elementach otaczającej nas rzeczywistości materialnej, takich jak ubrania, akcesoria, meble, dekoracje, ale przede wszystkim w komunikacji marketingowej firm i marek. Analiza ta wyrasta z przekonania o roli rzeczy jako czynników kształtujących rzeczywistość społeczną zgodnie z teorią aktora-sieci Bruno Latoura. Wytwory materialne będące nośnikami motywu tęczy nabierają niekiedy waloru retorycznego, gdy tęcza jako symbol staje się narzędziem przekonywania. Te właśnie sytuacje, a szczególnie użycie tęczy jako symbolu środowisk LGBTQ+ w celu kształtowania wizerunku marki, znane jako tęczowy kapitalizm oraz tzw. rainbow washing zostaną zbadane w artykule za pomocą narzędzi retoryki, a zwłaszcza retoryki wizualnej. Perswazja nie odbywa się tu bowiem za pomocą kodu werbalnego, lecz głównie przez kod wizualny. Do wyjaśnienia tych zjawisk zostaną wykorzystane narzędzia retoryki, takie jak koncepcja identyfikacji oraz dwa elementy z triady środków perswazyjnych: ethos i pathos. Także rozróżnienie perswazji i manipulacji okaże się przydatne w analizie omawianego zjawiska.
5
Content available remote

Наименования радуги как реализация возможностей этнолингвистического притяжения

80%
Антропов Н. П.
Etnolingwistyka. Problemy Języka i Kultury
|
2011
|
vol. 23
195-203
PL
Autor opisuje wybrane nominacje tęczy w językach wschodniosłowiańskich, sytuując je w wielokierunkowych relacjach adideacji etnolingwistycznej (ètnolingvističeskich pritjaženij). Ètnolingvističeskoe pritjaženie pojmowane jest jako szczególny przypadek etymologii ludowej (inaczej: fałszywej), do którego dochodzi przy zestawieniu wyrazów o odmiennej (lub nieprzejrzystej) etymologii. W efekcie prowadzi to do powstania szczególnego typu magii. Najszerzej rozpowszechniona w językach wschodniosłowiańskich nazwa tęczy -- raduga -- wiązana jest: 1) z prasłowiańskim rdzeniem *rad- ‘radosny, wesoły’ lub 2) z prasłowiańskim rdzeniem *dǫga `łuk’. W artykule opisuje się również kojarzenie radugi z polem semantycznym ‘rodzenia’ i ‘kradzieży’. Przeprowadzona przez autora analiza trzech zespołów wschodniosłowiańskich nazw tęczy o rdzeniach rad-, rod- i krad- potwierdza możliwość różnych rozwiązań i decyzji etymologicznych.
EN
The author describes selected nominations of the rainbow in East-Slavic languages, situating them in multidimensional relations of ethnolinguistic adideation (ètnolingvističeskoe prityaženye). Ètnolingvističeskoe prityaženye is understood as a special case of folk (or false) etymology, which emerges when words of different (or opaque) etymologies are juxtaposed. As a result, a special kind of magic is activated. The most common East-Slavic name of the rainbow, raduga, is connected with (1) the Proto-Slavic root *rad- ‘joyful, merry’, or (2) the Proto-Slavic root *dǫga ‘arch’. The article is also concerned with the associations between raduga and the semantic fields of ‘giving birth’ and ‘stealing’. An analysis of three East-Slavic names of the rainbow rad-, rod- and krad-, confirms the possibility of various etymological solutions.
6
Publication available in full text mode
Content available

Firmament i ciała niebieskie świadkami Boga (Syr 43,1-12)

61%
Piwowar A.
|
2017
|
vol. 7
|
issue 1
5-48
EN
Sir 43:1-12 constitutes the first section of the major part of the hymn celebrating the Creator (42:15–43:33). It is a poetic commentary on the fourth day of creation as depicted in the Book of Genesis (Gen 1:14-19). In his depiction of the firmament, sun, moon, stars and rainbow, Sirach emphasizes their beauty in a manner unparalleled in the whole Bible. This does not serve cosmological aims (the sage’s motive is not the transmission of knowledge about the structure and functioning of the cosmos – celestial bodies) but has clear theological precepts and message. The pericope’s aim is to present and glorify God as the Creator. The firmament, celestial bodies and rainbow are tools through which the sage conveys knowledge of God’s might, greatness, wisdom and beauty. All of these entities derive from God (cf. 43:33) and lead to him. Sir 43:1-12 has a clear polemical character, visible in questioning the beliefs of other cultures and religions – which posited celestial bodies as deities or realities that could exert substantial influence on human beings (astrology) – or of some Jewish groups which did not use lunar calendar.
PL
Sir 43:1-12 constitutes the first section of the major part of the hymn celebrating the Creator (42:15 – 43:33). It is a poetic commentary on the fourth day of creation as depicted in the Book of Genesis (Gen 1:14-19). In his depiction of the firmament, sun, moon, stars and rainbow, Sirach emphasizes their beauty in a manner unparalleled in the whole Bible. This does not serve cosmological aims (the sage’s motive is not the transmission of knowledge about the structure and functioning of the cosmos – celestial bodies) but has clear theological precepts and message. The pericope’s aim is to present and glorify God as the Creator. The firmament, celestial bodies and rainbow are tools through which the sage conveys knowledge of God’s might, greatness, wisdom and beauty. All of these entities derive from God (cf. 43:33) and lead to him. Sir 43:1-12 has a clear polemical character, visible in questioning the beliefs of other cultures and religions – which posited celestial bodies as deities or realities that could exert substantial influence on human beings (astrology) – or of some Jewish groups which did not use lunar calendar. 
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.