Results found: 2

Search results

Search:
in the keywords: res

Sort By:

Limit search:

LA CURIEUSE DESTINÉE DE LA RES ROMAINE : DU CHAMP PROCESSUEL AUX MUTATIONS MODERNES

100%

PATURET A.

Comparative Legilinguistics

2017

vol. 30

67-83

Roman Law is often considered as an intellectual matrix of contemporary laws and in particular French civil law. However, even if the vocabulary persisted, some legal concepts went throught great changes across history as law was step by step related to a subject’s power. The notion of thing originally meant the trial, the case, the litigious situation managed by the legal process. In this way the thing was directly a res iuris. In contemporary law system, the thing ordinarily specifies some goods on which the subject applies his property power. This view is understandable considering the evolution due to the theorization of subjective law that leads to promote a strong and exclusive separation between persons and things while Roman law could imbricate these legal categories.

Niniejszy artykuł porusza problematykę konceptu res, którego znaczenie ewoluowało na przestrzeni wieków od czasów prawa rzymskiego do czasów współczesnych. Prawo rzymskie często jest postrzegane jako matryca intelektualna współczesnych systemów prawnych. Należy jednak pamiętać, że proces zapożyczania pojęć praw rzymskiego jest zagadnieniem złożonym. W bardzo wielu przypadkach zapożyczona instytucja była modyfikowana i dostosowywana do realiów systemu, który ją recypował. Między innymi doprowadziło to do wyraźnego rozróżnienia na osoby i rzeczy we współczesnych systemach prawnych, mimo że w prawie rzymskim istniała możliwość łączenia tych kategorii.

Le droit romain est souvent considéré comme une matrice intellectuelle, linguistique et conceptuelle des droits européens contemporains et en particulier du droit civil français. Toutefois, si le vocabulaire a persisté dans une certaine mesure, des notions juridiques fondamentales ont subi de profondes transformations au cours de l’histoire à mesure que le droit s’assimilait progressivement à un pouvoir. Il en est ainsi du concept de chose qui désignait à l’origine le procès ou la situation litigieuse mise en forme par la procédure juridique en droit romain. Dans le système contemporain, la chose signifie d’ordinaire un bien matériel indépendant du sujet dans la droite application de la théorisation moderne du droit subjectif. Cette conception est le fruit d’une opposition nette entre le sujet et l’objet, laquelle a promu une catégorisation étanche des personnes et des choses inconnue du droit romain.

Rhetorical theory in the third book of Quintilian’s

67%

Śnieżewski S.

Classica Cracoviensia

2013

issue 16

113-135

Quintilian focuses on presenting the beginnings of rhetorical art, its components, how it is expressed and formed. Rhetoric is an art, though it serves a practical, useful function. Nature gave birth to speech, while observation created the art of speech. Every speech is built out of that which is signified (quae significantur) and that which signifies (quae significant), that is, out of res and verba. The ability to speak is perfected by nature, art and practice, though some authors add imitation as well, whereas Quintilian believes imitation to be a part of ars. The most important question discussed by Quintilian is status, i.e. the basis or foundation, the point of contention in a judiciary dispute. Some call it constitutio, others quaestio, still others quod ex quaestione appareat, while Theodorus of Gadara names it caput, that is kef£laion genikw;taton. The Greeks use the term sta;sivj and claim this name was not invented by Hermagoras, but by Naucrates, student of Isocrates, or by Zopyros of Clazomenae. This is the moment when the first clash between the two parties takes place or because it forms the basis of the whole case. However, there does not exist any agreement between the authors on the number and definitions of the term status, nor on the difference between status generales and speciales. In every kind of case there is a cause (causa), the crux of the matter (iudicatio) and the main argument (continens). Insistent begging (rogare), foretelling (iudicare), argumentation (rationem reddere) exist in judiciary, advisory and epideictic speeches. Hermagoras`s opinion that we should consider the subject of the case (quaestio), line of defense (ratio), crux of the matter (iudicatio), the main argument (continens) or, as others call it, the main point of their accusation or defense (firmamentum). There exists a common consensus that quaestio originates from another quaestio and that species can be divided into other species. Quaestio principalis (fundamental) is called zh;thma. Ratio is a method of defense in a situation when the deed was committed. Quintilian uses a widely known example provided by his predecessors; Orestes killed his mother, he admits it and claims that what he did was right. What counts the most is the authority of the speaker. The orator should possess knowledge and extraordinary virtues of character.

Refine search results

1 Classica Cracoviensia

1 Comparative Legilinguistics

1 PATURET A.

1 Śnieżewski S.

1 2017

1 2013

Search results

LA CURIEUSE DESTINÉE DE LA RES ROMAINE : DU CHAMP PROCESSUEL AUX MUTATIONS MODERNES

Rhetorical theory in the third book of Quintilian’s