Skip to main content Accessibility help
Hostname: page-component-7d684dbfc8-hffkp Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2023-09-25T06:59:00.097Z Has data issue: false Feature Flags: { "corePageComponentGetUserInfoFromSharedSession": true, "coreDisableEcommerce": false, "coreDisableSocialShare": false, "coreDisableEcommerceForArticlePurchase": false, "coreDisableEcommerceForBookPurchase": false, "coreDisableEcommerceForElementPurchase": false, "coreUseNewShare": true, "useRatesEcommerce": true } hasContentIssue false


Published online by Cambridge University Press:  13 July 2021

Lodi Nauta
Rijksuniversiteit Groningen, The Netherlands
Get access


Image of the first page of this content. For PDF version, please use the ‘Save PDF’ preceeding this image.'
Philosophy and the Language of the People
The Claims of Common Speech from Petrarch to Locke
, pp. 252 - 270
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2021

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.)


Aaron, R. I. (1967). The Theory of Universals. Oxford.Google Scholar
Aarsleff, H. (1964). “Leibniz on Locke on Language.American Philosophical Quarterly 1: 165188.Google Scholar
Aarsleff, H. (2001). “Introduction.” In Condillac 2001, xixxxviii.Google Scholar
Adams, M. M. (1987). William of Ockham. 2 vols. Notre Dame, IN.Google Scholar
Adriaenssen, H. T. (2017). Representation and Scepticism from Aquinas to Descartes. Cambridge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Adriaenssen, H. T., and Georgescu, L. (eds.). (forthcoming). Navigating the Old and the New: The Philosophy of Kenelm Digby. Berlin.Google Scholar
Aertsen, J. A. (1996). Medieval Philosophy and the Transcendentals: The Case of Thomas Aquinas. Leiden.Google Scholar
Agricola, R. (1539). De inventione dialectica: Lucubrationes. Ed. Alard of Amsterdam. Cologne. (Repr. by Nieuwkoop 1967).Google Scholar
Agricola, R. (2002). Letters. Ed. and trans. van der Laan, A. and Akkerman, F.. Assen.Google Scholar
Apel, K. O. (1975). Die Idee der Sprache in der Tradition von Dante bis Vico. 2nd revised ed. Bonn.Google Scholar
Aristotle. (1984). The Complete Works of Aristotle: The Revised Oxford Translation. Ed. Barnes, J.. 2 vols. Princeton.Google Scholar
Aristotle (1993). Posterior Analytics. Trans. Barnes, J.. Oxford.Google Scholar
Arnauld, A., and Nicole, P.. (1992). Logique ou l’art de penser. Paris.Google Scholar
Ashworth, E. J. (1981). “‘Do Words Signify Ideas or Things?’ The Scholastic Sources of Locke’s Theory of Language.Journal of the History of Philosophy 19: 299326. [Repr. in her Studies in Post-Medieval Semantics. London 1985, no. VII.]CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ashworth, E. J. (1984). “Locke on Language.Canadian Journal of Philosophy 14: 4573. [Repr. in Locke, ed. V. Chappell, Oxford 1998, 175198.]CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Atherton, M. (1998). “The Inessentiality of Lockean Essences.” In Locke. Ed. Chappell, V., 199213. Oxford.Google Scholar
Atherton, M. (2007). “Locke on Essences and Classification.” In The Cambridge Companion to Locke’s “Essay concerning Human Understanding.” Ed. Newman, L., 258285. Cambridge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ayers, M. (1991). Locke: Epistemology and Ontology. 2 vols. London.Google Scholar
Ayers, M. (2004). “Popkin’s Revised Scepticism.British Journal for the History of Philosophy 12: 319332.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ayers, M. (2013). “Essences and Signification: Response to Martin Lenz.” In Continuity and Innovation in Medieval and Modern Philosophy. Knowledge, Mind, and Language. Ed. Marenbon, J., 6979. Oxford.Google Scholar
Backus, I. (2009). “The Issue of Reformation Scepticism Revisited: What Erasmus and Sebastian Castellio Did or Did Not Know.” In Renaissance Scepticisms. Ed. Paganini, G. and Maia Neto, J. R., 6389. Dordrecht.Google Scholar
Bacon, F. (1857–1874). The Works. Ed. Spedding, J., Ellis, R. L., and Heath, D. D.. 14 vols. London.Google Scholar
Bacon, F. (2000). The New Organon [1620]. Ed. Jardine, L. and Silverthorne, M.. Cambridge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Barnes, J. (1969). “Aristotle’s Theory of Demonstration.Phronesis 14: 123152.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Barnes, J. (1993). “Introduction.” In Aristotle 1993, xixxv.Google Scholar
Barnes, J. (2001). “Locke and the Syllogism.” In Whose Aristotle? Whose Aristotelianism? Ed. Sharples, R. W., 105132. Aldershot.Google Scholar
Baron, H. (1928). Leonardo Bruni Aretino. Humanistisch-philosophische Schriften, mit einer Chronologie seiner Werke und Briefe. Wiesbaden.Google Scholar
Bennett, J. (1971). Locke, Berkeley, Hume: Central Themes. Oxford.Google Scholar
Bertman, M. (1978). “Hobbes on Language and Reality.Revue internationale de philosophie 32: 536550.Google Scholar
Bianchi, L. (2007). “Continuity and Change in the Aristotelian Tradition.” In The Cambridge Companion to Renaissance Philosophy. Ed. Hankins, J., 4971. Cambridge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bird, O. (1962). “The Tradition of the Logical Topics: Aristotle to Ockham.Journal of the History of Ideas 23: 307323.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Birkenmajer, A. (1922). “Der Streit des Alonso von Cartagena mit Leonardo Bruni Aretino.Vermischte Untersuchungen zur Geschichte der mittelalterlichen Philosophie, Beiträge zur Geschichte der Philosophie des Mittelalters 20: 129210.Google Scholar
Birkhead, T. (2018). The Wonderful Mr Willughby: The First True Ornithologist. London.Google Scholar
Black, M. (1969). “Some Troubles with Whorfianism.” In Language and Philosophy. Ed. Hook, S., 3035. New York.Google Scholar
Black, M. 1972. The Labyrinth of Language. London.Google Scholar
Blair, A. (2006). “Natural Philosophy.” In The Cambridge History of Science, Vol. 3: Early Modern Science. Ed. Park, K. and Daston, L., 365406. Cambridge.Google Scholar
Blair, A., and Grafton, A.. (1992). “Reassessing Humanism and Science.Journal of the History of Ideas 53: 529540.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Boethius, A. M. S. (1978). De topicis differentiis. Trans. Stump, E.. Ithaca, NY.Google Scholar
Boethius, A. M. S. (1988). In Ciceronis Topica. Trans. Stump, E.. Ithaca, NY.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Botley, P. (2004). Latin Translation in the Renaissance: The Theory and Practice of Leonardo Bruni, Giannozzo Manetti and Desiderius Erasmus. Cambridge.Google Scholar
Breen, Q. (1952). “Giovanni Pico della Mirandola on the Conflict of Philosophy and Rhetoric.Journal of the History of Ideas 13: 384412.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Breen, Q. (1956). “Introduction.” In Nizolio 1956.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Breen, Q. (1958). “The Antiparadoxon of Marcantonius Majoragius or, A Humanist Becomes a Critic of Cicero as a Philosopher.Studies in the Renaissance 5: 3748.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Breen, Q. (1968). Christianity and Humanism. Studies in the History of Ideas. Ed. Ros, N. P.. Grand Rapids, MI.Google Scholar
Brekle, H. E. (1985). Einführung in die Geschichte der Sprachwissenschaft. Darmstadt.Google Scholar
Broadie, A. (1993). Introduction to Medieval Logic. 2nd revised ed. Oxford.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brockdorff, C. von. (1919). Hobbes als Philosoph, Pädagoge und Soziologe. Kiel.Google Scholar
Bruni, L. (1741). Leonardi Bruni Arretini Epistolarum libri VIII. Ed. Mehus, L.. 2 vols. Florence.Google Scholar
Bruni, L. (1928). Leonardo Bruni Aretino. Humanistisch-philosophische Schriften, mit einer Chronologie seiner Werke und Briefe. Ed. Baron, H.. Wiesbaden.Google Scholar
Bruni, L. (1987). The Humanism of Leonardo Bruni: Selected Texts. Ed. and trans. Griffiths, G., Hankins, J. and Thompson, D.. Binghamton, NY.Google Scholar
Bruni, L. (2013). Opere letterarie e politiche. Ed. Viti, P.. Turin.Google Scholar
Buccolini, C. (2017). “The Philosophy of Francisco Sanches: Academic Scepticism and Conjectural Empiricism.” In Academic Scepticism in the Development of Early Modern Philosophy. Ed. Junqueira Smith, P. and Charles, S., 123. Berlin.Google Scholar
Burchell, D. (2007). “‘A Plain, Blunt Man’. Hobbes, Science, and Rhetoric Revisited.” In Science, Literature and Rhetoric in Early-Modern England. Ed. Cummins, J. and Burchell, D., 5374. Abingdon.Google Scholar
Burke, P. (1995). “The Jargon of the Schools.” In Languages and Jargons: Contributions to a Social History of Language. Ed. Burke, P. and Porter, R., 241. Cambridge.Google Scholar
Burnyeat, M. F. (1981). “Aristotle on Understanding Knowledge.” In Aristotle on Science: The Posterior Analytics. Ed. Berti, E., 97139. Padua.Google Scholar
Caluori, D. (2007). “The Scepticism of Francisco Sanches.Archiv für Geschichte der Philosophie 89: 3046.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Caluori, D. (2018). “Francisco Sanchez: A Renaissance Pyrrhonist Against Aristotelian Dogmatism.” In Skepticism: From Antiquity to the Present. Ed. Machuca, D. E. and Reed, B., 260270. London.Google Scholar
Cameron, M. (2012). “Meaning in the Middle Ages: Foundational and Semantic Theories.” In Oxford Handbook of Medieval Philosophy. Ed. Marenbon, J., 342362. Oxford.Google Scholar
Camporeale, S. I. 1972. Lorenzo Valla: Umanesimo e teologia. Florence.Google Scholar
Casini, L. 2006. Cognitive and Moral Psychology in Renaissance Philosophy: A Study of Juan Luis Vives’ “De anima et vita.” Uppsala.Google Scholar
Casini, L. 2009. “Self-Knowledge, Scepticism and the Quest for a New Method: Juan Luis Vives on Cognition and the Impossibility of Perfect Knowledge.” In Renaissance Scepticisms. Ed. Paganini, G. and Maria Neto, J. R., 3360. Dordrecht.Google Scholar
Cassirer, E. 1906–1957. Das Erkenntnisproblem in der Philosophie und Wissenschaft der neueren Zeit. 4 vols. Darmstadt.Google Scholar
Cassirer, E., Kristeller, P. O., and Randall, J. H., Jr. 1948. The Renaissance Philosophy of Man. Chicago, Ill.Google Scholar
Casson, D. 2016. “John Locke, Clipped Coins, and the Unstable Currency of Public Reason.” In Etica and Politica / Ethics & Politics 18: 153180.Google Scholar
Cave, T. 1979. The Cornucopian Text. Problems of Writing in the French Renaissance. Oxford.Google Scholar
Celenza, C. 2018. The Intellectual World of the Italian Renaissance: Language, Philosophy, and the Search for Meaning. Cambridge.Google Scholar
Cesarini Martinelli, L. 1980. “Note sulla polemica Poggio-Valla e sulla fortuna delle Elegantiae.Interpres: Rivista di studi quattrocenteschi 3: 2979.Google Scholar
Chappell, V. 1994. “Locke’s Theory of Ideas.” In The Cambridge Companion to Locke. Ed. Chappell, V., 2655. Cambridge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chiaradonna, R. 2019. “Galen and Middle Platonists on Dialectic and Knowledge.” In Dialectic after Plato and Aristotle. Ed. Bénatouïl, T. and Ierodiakonou, K., 320370. Cambridge.Google Scholar
Christmann, H. H. 1966. “Beiträge zur Geschichte vom Weltbild der Sprache.Abhandlungen der Geistes- und Sozialwissenschaftlichen Klasse der Akademie der Wissenschaften und der Literatur in Mainz 7: 441469.Google Scholar
Cicero, M. T. 1913. De officiis. Trans. Miller, W.. Cambridge, Mass.Google Scholar
Cicero, M. T. 1928. De republica, De legibus. Trans. Walker Keyes, C.. Cambridge, Mass.Google Scholar
Cicero, M. T. 1942. De oratore III, De fato, Paradoxa Stoicorum, De partitione oratoria. Trans. Rackham, H.. 2 vols. Cambridge, Mass.Google Scholar
Cicero, M. T. 1949. De inventione, De optimo genere oratorum, Topica. Ed. and trans. Hubbell, H. M.. Cambridge, Mass.Google Scholar
Cicero, M. T. 1951. De natura deorum, Academica. Ed. and trans. Rackham, H.. Cambridge, Mass.Google Scholar
Codoñer Merino, C. 2010. “Elegantia y gramática.” In Lorenzo Valla: La Riforma della lingua e della logica. 2 vols. Ed. Regoliosi, M., 1: 67109. Florence.Google Scholar
Cogan, M. 1984. “Rodolphus Agricola and the Semantic Revolutions of the History of Invention.Rhetorica 2: 163194.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Colie, R. L. 1965. “The Social Language of John Locke: A Study in the History of Ideas.Journal of British Studies 4: 2951.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Collins, J. R. 2005. The Allegiance of Thomas Hobbes. Oxford.Google Scholar
Comparot, A. 1983. Amour et Vérité: Sebon, Vivès et Montaigne. Paris.Google Scholar
Condillac, E. B. de. 2001. Essay on the Origin of Human Knowledge. Trans. Aarsleff, H.. Cambridge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Copenhaver, B. P. 1988. “Translation, Terminology and Style in Philosophical Discourse.” In Cambridge History of Renaissance Philosophy. Ed. Schmitt, C. and Skinner, Q., with Kessler, E. and Kraye, J., 77110. Cambridge.Google Scholar
Copenhaver, B. P., and Schmitt, C. B.. 1992. Renaissance Philosophy. Oxford.Google Scholar
Coseriu, E. 1971. “Zur Sprachtheorie von Juan Luis Vives.” InAus der französischen Kultur- und Geistesgeschichte. Festschrift Walter Mönch, 234255. Heidelberg.Google Scholar
Cotroneo, G. 1971. I trattatisti dell’ “Ars historica.” Naples.Google Scholar
Crescini, A. 1965. Le origini del metodo analitico: il cinquecento. Udine.Google Scholar
Cummings, B. 2002. The Literary Culture of the Reformation: Grammar and Grace. Oxford.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Curley, E. “Introduction.” In Hobbes 1994b, viiixlvii.Google Scholar
Dascal, M. 1976. “Language and Money. A Simile and its Meaning in 17th Century Philosophy of Language.Studia Leibnitiana 8: 187218.Google Scholar
Dawson, H. 2007. Locke, Language and Early-Modern Philosophy. Cambridge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dear, P. 1988. Mersenne and the Learning of the Schools. Ithaca, N.Y./London.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
De Carvalho, J. 1955. In Sanches 1955.Google Scholar
De Gandt, F. 2001. “Response to Jonathan Barnes.” In Whose Aristotle? Whose Aristotelianism? Ed. Sharples, R. W., 133134. Aldershot.Google Scholar
Deitz, L. 2007. “Francesco Patrizi da Cherso’s Criticism of Aristotle’s Logic.Vivarium 45: 113124.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Del Nero, V. 1991. Linguaggio e filosofia in Vives. L’organizzazione del sapere nel “De disciplinis” (1531). Bologna.Google Scholar
Del Nero, V. 2008. “The De disciplinis as a Model of a Humanistic Text.” In A Companion to Juan Luis Vives. Ed. Fantazzi, C., 177226. Leiden.Google Scholar
Demonet, M.-L. 1992. Les Voix du Signe: Nature et origine de langage à la Renaissance. Paris.Google Scholar
Den Haan, A. 2016. Giannozzo Manetti’s New Testament: Translation Theory and Practice in Fifteenth-Century Italy. Leiden.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Descartes, R. 1984–1991. The Philosophical Writings. Trans. Cottingham, J., Stoothoff, R. and Murdoch, D., with Kenny, A.. 3 vols. Cambridge.Google Scholar
Digby, K. 1644. Two Treatises. Paris.Google Scholar
Diogenes Laertius, . 1925. Lives of Eminent Philosophers. 2 vols. Ed. Hicks, R. D.. Cambridge, Mass.Google Scholar
Dubois, C.-G. 1970. Mythe et langage au seizième siècle. Bordeaux.Google Scholar
Duncan, S. 2016. “Hobbes on Language: Propositions, Truth, and Absurdity.” In The Oxford Handbook of Hobbes. Ed. Martinich, A. P. and Hoekstra, K., 6075. Oxford.Google Scholar
Duns Scotus, J. 1997–1998. Questions on the Metaphysics of Aristotle. Trans. Etzkorn, G. J. and Wolter, A. B.. St Bonaventure, N.Y.Google Scholar
Eamon, W. 1996. Science and the Secrets of Nature. Books of Secrets in Medieval and Early Modern Culture. Princeton.Google Scholar
Elffers, E. 1996. “The History of Thought about Language and Thought.” In Linguistics in the Netherlands. Ed. Cremers, C. and den Dikken, M., 7384. Amsterdam.Google Scholar
Enenkel, K. A. E. and Papy, J. (eds.). 2006. Petrarch and His Readers in the Renaissance. Leiden.Google Scholar
Evans, N., and Levinson, S. C.. 2009. “The Myth of Language Universals: Language Diversity and Its Importance for Cognitive Science.Behavorial and Brain Sciences 32: 429448.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Faithfull, R. Glynn. 1953. “The Concept of ‘Living Language’ in Cinquecento Vernacular Philology.Modern Language Review 48: 278292.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fantazzi, C. (ed.). 2008. A Companion to Juan Luis Vives. Leiden.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fantham, E. 2004. The Roman World of Cicero’s “De Oratore.” Oxford.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Feingold, M. 1997. “The Humanities.” In The History of the University of Oxford. Ed. Tyacke, N.. Vol. 4, Seventeenth-Century Oxford, 211358. Oxford.Google Scholar
Feingold, M. 2001. “English Ramism: A Reinterpretation.” In The Influence of Petrus Ramus: Studies in Sixteenth and Seventeenth Century Philosophy and Sciences. Ed. Feingold, M., Freedman, J. S. and Rother, W., 127176. Basel.Google Scholar
Fenves, P. 2001. Arresting Language: From Leibniz to Benjamin. Stanford, Calif.Google Scholar
Ferraù, G. 1983. Pontano critico. Messina.Google Scholar
Floridi, L. 2002. Sextus Empiricus: The Transmission and Recovery of Pyrrhonism. Oxford.Google Scholar
France, P. 1972. Rhetoric and Truth in France. Descartes to Diderot. Oxford.Google Scholar
Frank, G. 1995. Die theologische Philosophie Philipp Melanchthons (1497–1560). Leipzig.Google Scholar
Friedrich, M. 2002. “‘War Rudolf Agricola Nominalist?’ Zur Bedeutung der Philosophie Ockhams für den Sprachhumanismus.” In: Res et Verba in der Renaissance. Ed. Kessler, E. and Maclean, I., 369388. Wiesbaden.Google Scholar
Gaisser, J. H. 2012. “Introduction.” In Pontano 2012, viixxvii.Google Scholar
Garber, D. 2001. “Semel in Vita: The Scientific Background to Descartes’ Meditations.” In Garber, D., Descartes Embodied: Reading Cartesian Philosophy Through Cartesian Science, 221256. Cambridge. [Originally published 1986 in Essays on Descartes’ “Meditations.” Ed. A. O. Rorty, Berkeley, Calif., 81116.]Google Scholar
Garin, E. 1951. “Noterelle sulla filosofia del Rinascimento.Rinascimento 2: 319336.Google Scholar
Gassendi, P. 1658. Opera Omnia. Lyon.Google Scholar
Gassendi, P. 1972. The Selected Works of Pierre Gassendi. Ed. and transBrush, . C. B.. New York.Google Scholar
Gassendi, P. 1981. Institutio Logica (1658). Trans. Jones, H.. Assen.Google Scholar
Gaukroger, S. 1989. Cartesian Logic. Oxford.Google Scholar
Gavinelli, S. 1991. “Teorie grammaticali nelle Elegantie e la tradizione scolastica del tardo umanesimo.Rinascimento 31: 155181.Google Scholar
Gera, D. L. 2003. Ancient Greek Ideas on Speech, Language and Civilization. Oxford.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gerl, H.-B. 1981. Philosophie und Philologie: Leonardo Brunis Überträgung der nikomachischen Ethik in ihren philosophischen Prämissen. Munich.Google Scholar
Germano, G. 2005. Il “De aspiratione” di Giovanni Pontano e la cultura del suo tempo. Naples.Google Scholar
Gert, B. 2001. “Hobbes on Reason.Pacific Philosophical Quarterly 82: 243257.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Glucker, J. 1995. “Probabile, Veri Simile, and Related Terms.” In Cicero the Philosopher. Twelve Papers. Ed. Powell, J. G. F., 85113. Oxford.Google Scholar
Goldie, M. 1983. “John Locke and Anglican Royalism.Political Studies 31: 6185.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gordon, D. 1994. Citizens without Sovereignty: Equality and Sociability in French Thought, 1670–1789. Princeton.Google Scholar
Görler, W. 1995. “Silencing the Troublemaker: De Legibus I.39 and the Continuity of Cicero’s Scepticism.” In Cicero the Philosopher. Twelve Papers. Ed. Powell, J. G. F., 85113. Oxford.Google Scholar
Gotti, M. 1996. Robert Boyle and the Language of Science. Milan.Google Scholar
Grafton, A. and Siraisi, N.. 1999. “Introduction.” In Natural Particulars. Nature and the Disciplines in Renaissance Europe. Ed. Grafton, A. and Siraisi, N., 121. Cambridge, Mass.Google Scholar
Green-Pedersen, N. J. 1984. The Tradition of the Topics in the Middle Ages. Munich.Google Scholar
Grosseteste, R. 1981. Commentarius in posteriorum analyticorum libros. Ed. Rossi, P.. Florence.Google Scholar
Guerlac, R. 1979. “Introduction.” In Vives 1979, 143.Google Scholar
Guyer, P. 1994. “Locke’s Philosophy of Language.” In The Cambridge Companion to Locke. Ed. Chappell, V., 115145. Cambridge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Haas, W. 1962. “The Theory of Translation.Philosophy 37: 208228.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hacking, I. 1975. Why Does Language Matter to Philosophy? Cambridge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hall, R. A. 1936. “Linguistic Theory in the Italian Renaissance.Language 12: 96107.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hankins, J. 1987. “The New Language.” In Bruni 1987.Google Scholar
Hankins, J. 2003. “The Ethics Controversy.” In Humanism and Platonism in the Italian Renaissance. 2 vols. Rome, 1: 193241.Google Scholar
Hankins, J. 2006. “The Popularization of Humanism in the Fifteenth Century: The Writings of Leonardo Bruni in Latin and the Vernacular.” In Language and Cultural Change. Aspects of the Study and Use of Language in the Later Middle Ages and the Renaissance. Ed. Nauta, L., 133147. Leuven.Google Scholar
Hankins, J. 2007. “The Significance of Renaissance Philosophy.” In The Cambridge Companion to Renaissance Philosophy. Ed. Hankins, J., 338345. Cambridge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hankins, J. 2007–2008. “Petrarch and the Canon of Neo-Latin Literature.” In Petrarca, l’Umanesimo e la civiltà europea. Atti del Convegno Internazionale, Firenze, 5–10 dicembre 2004, II (= Quaderni petrarcheschim 1718). Ed. Coppini, D. and Feo, M., 905922. Florence.Google Scholar
Hankins, J. 2019. Virtue Politics: Soulcraft and Statecraft in Renaissance Italy. Cambridge, Mass.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hankinson, R. 2008. “Epistemology.” In The Cambridge Companion to Galen. Ed. Hankinson, R., 157183. Cambridge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Harth, D. 1970. Philologie und praktische Philosophie. Untersuchungen zum Sprach- und Traditionsverständnis des Erasmus von Rotterdam. Munich.Google Scholar
Harth, H. 1968. “Leonardo’s Brunis Selbstverständnis als Übersetzer.Archiv für Kulturgeschichte 50: 4163.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Helmrath, J. 2010. “Streitkultur. Die Invektive bei den italienischen Humanisten.” In Die Kunst des Streitens. Inszenierung, Formen und Funktionen öffentlichen Streits in historischer Perspektive. Ed. Laureys, M. and Simons, R., 261293. Göttingen.Google Scholar
Hidalgo-Serna, E. 1990. “Metaphorical Language, Rhetoric, and Comprehensio: J. L. Vives and M. Nizolio.Philosophy and Rhetoric 23: 111.Google Scholar
Hill, J. H. 1988. “Language, Culture, and World View.” In Language: The Socio-Cultural Context. Ed. Newmeyer, F. J., 1436. Cambridge.Google Scholar
Hobbes, T. 1839–1845. The English Works of Thomas Hobbes of Malmesbury. Ed. Molesworth, W.. 11 vols. London. [= EW]Google Scholar
Hobbes, T. 1839–1845. Opera philosophica quae latine scripsit omnia. Ed. Molesworth, W.. London. [= OL]Google Scholar
Hobbes, T. 1839. “Concerning Body.” In EW I.Google Scholar
Hobbes, T. 1840a. “Of Liberty and Necessity.” In EW IV.Google Scholar
Hobbes, T. 1840b. “Answer to Bramhall.” In EW IV.Google Scholar
Hobbes, T. 1840c. “Answer to Davenant.” In EW IV.Google Scholar
Hobbes, T. 1841. “Questions concerning Liberty, Necessity and Chance.” In EW V.Google Scholar
Hobbes, T. 1845a. “Six Lessons to the Professors of Mathematics.” In EW VII.Google Scholar
Hobbes, T. 1845b. “Examinatio et Emendatio Mathematicae Hodiernae.” In OL IV.Google Scholar
Hobbes, T. 1845c. “Principa et Problema Aliquot Geometrica.” In OL V.Google Scholar
Hobbes, T. 1981. Part I of “De Corpore.” Trans. Martinich, A. P.. New York.Google Scholar
Hobbes, T. 1991. Man and Citizen (De homine and De cive). Ed. Gert, B.. Indianapolis, Ind.Google Scholar
Hobbes, T. 1994a. The Elements of Law Natural and Politic. Ed. Gaskin, J. C. A.. Oxford.Google Scholar
Hobbes, T. 1994b. Leviathan, with Selected Variants from the Latin Edition 1668. Ed. Curley, E.. Indianapolis, Ind.Google Scholar
Hobbes, T. 1998. On the Citizen. Trans. Tuck, R. and Silverthorne, M.. Cambridge.Google Scholar
Hobbes, T. 1999a. De Corpore: Elementorum philosophiae sectio prima. Ed. Schuhmann, K.. Paris.Google Scholar
Hobbes, T. 1999b. Hobbes and Bramhall on Liberty and Necessity. Ed. Chappell, V.. Cambridge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hobbes, T. 2005. A Dialogue between a Philosopher and a Student, of the Common Laws of England / Questions relative to Hereditary Right. Ed. Cromartie, A. and Skinner, Q.. Oxford.Google Scholar
Hobbes, T. 2010. Behemoth. Ed. Seaward, P.. Oxford.Google Scholar
Hobbes, T. 2012. Leviathan. Ed. Malcolm, N.. 3 vols. Oxford.Google Scholar
Horace, . 1926. Satires. Epistles. The Art of Poetry. Trans. Fairclough, H. R.. Cambridge, Mass.Google Scholar
Hotson, H. 2007. Commonplace Learning: Ramism and its German Ramifications, 1543–1630. Oxford.Google Scholar
Howald, K. 2007. “Einleitung.” In Sanches 2007, ixclxiv.Google Scholar
Hume, D. 1978. Treatise on Human Nature. Ed. Selby-Bigge, L. A.. Oxford.Google Scholar
Inwood, B., and Mansfeld, J. (eds.) 1997. Assent and Argument: Studies in Cicero’s “Academic Books.” Leiden.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Isermann, M. 1991. Die Sprachtheorie im Werk von Thomas Hobbes. Münster.Google Scholar
Jardine, L. 1974. Francis Bacon. Discovery and the Art of Discourse. London.Google Scholar
Jardine, L. 1977. “Lorenzo Valla and the Intellectual Origins of Humanist Dialectic.Journal of the History of Philosophy 15: 143164.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jardine, L. 1983. “Lorenzo Valla: Academic Scepticism and the New Humanist Dialectic.” In The Skeptical Tradition. Ed. Burnyeat, M., 253286. Berkeley, Calif.Google Scholar
Jardine, L. 1988. “Humanistic Logic.” In The Cambridge History of Renaissance Philosophy. Ed. Schmitt, C. and Skinner, Q., with Kessler, E. and Kraye, J., 173198. Cambridge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jesseph, D. M. 1999. Squaring the Circle: The War between Hobbes and Wallis. Chicago, Ill.Google Scholar
Jesseph, D. M. 2018. “Hobbes and the Syllogism.” InThe Aftermath of Syllogism Aristotelian Logical Argument from Avicenna to Hegel. Ed. Sgarbi, M. and Cosci, M., 6782. London.Google Scholar
Johnston, D. 1986. “The Rhetoric of Leviathan.” Thomas Hobbes and the Politics of Cultural Transformation. Princeton, N.J.Google Scholar
Jolley, N. 1984. Leibniz and Locke: A Study of the “New Essays on Human Understanding.” Oxford.Google Scholar
Jolley, N. 1999. Locke: His Philosophical Thought. Oxford.Google Scholar
Jones, P. 1982. Hume’s Sentiments: Their Ciceronian and French Context. Edinburgh.Google Scholar
Jones, J.-E. 2012. “Locke on Real Essence.” In Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Scholar
Kahn, V. 1983. “Giovanni Pontano’s Rhetoric and Prudence.Philosophy and Rhetoric, 16: 1634.Google Scholar
Kahn, V. 1985. Rhetoric, Prudence, and Skepticism in the Renaissance. Ithaca, N.Y./London.Google Scholar
Kappl, B. 2006. Die Poetik des Aristoteles in der Dichtungstheorie des Cinquecento. Berlin.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kessler, E. 1979. “Humanismus und Naturwissenschaft bei Rudolf Agricola.” InL’Humanisme allemand (1480–1540). 18e Colloque international de Tours, 141157. Munich/Paris.Google Scholar
Kidwell, C. 1991. Pontano: Poet and Prime Minister. London.Google Scholar
Kircher, T. 2015. “Petrarch and the Humanists.” In The Cambridge Companion to Petrarch. Ed. Ascoli, A. R. and Falkeid, U., 179190. Cambridge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Klein, W. P. 1992. Am Anfang war das Wort: Theorie- und Wissenschaftsgeschichtliche Elemente frühneuzeitlichen Sprachbewusstseins. Berlin.Google Scholar
Klima, G. 2005. “The Essentialist Nominalism of John Buridan.The Review of Metaphysics 58: 739754.Google Scholar
Kneale, W., and Kneale, M.. 1962. The Development of Logic. Oxford.Google Scholar
Knowlson, J. 1975. Universal Language Schemes in England and France, 1600–1800. Toronto.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kondylis, P. 1990. Die neuzeitliche Metaphysikkritik. Stuttgart.Google Scholar
Kraye, J. 2001. “Lorenzo Valla and Changing Perspectives of Renaissance Humanism.Comparative Criticism 23: 3755.Google Scholar
Kraye, J. 2008. “Pico on the Relationship of Rhetoric and Philosophy.” In Pico della Mirandola: New Essays. Ed. Dougherty, M., 1336. Cambridge.Google Scholar
Kretzmann, N. 1967. “History of Semantics.” In The Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Ed. Edwards, P.. Vol. 7, 358406. New York.Google Scholar
Kretzmann, N. 1968. “The Main Thesis of Locke’s Semantic Theory.Philosophical Review 77: 175196.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kristeller, P. O. 1979. Renaissance Thought and Its Sources. New York.Google Scholar
Krostenko, B. A. 2001. Cicero, Catullus, and the Language of Social Performance. Chicago, Ill.Google Scholar
Laerke, M. 2009. “The Problem of Alloglossia. Leibniz on Spinoza’s Innovative Use of Philosophical Language.British Journal for the History of Philosophy 17: 939953.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Laerke, M. 2014. “Spinoza’s Language.Journal of the History of Philosophy 52: 519547.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Leibniz, G. W. 1966. Philosophische Schriften. Berlin.Google Scholar
Leibniz, G. W. 1969. Philosophical Papers and Letters. Trans. Loemker, L. E.. Dordrecht.Google Scholar
Leibniz, G. W. 1981. New Essays on Human Understanding (1765). Trans. Remnant, P. and Bennett, J.. Cambridge.Google Scholar
Leibniz, G. W. 1989. Philosophical Essays. Ed. and trans. Ariew, R. and Garber, D.. Indianapolis, Ind.Google Scholar
Leijenhorst, C. 2002a. The Mechanisation of Aristotelianism: The Late Aristotelian Setting of Thomas Hobbes’ Natural Philosophy. Leiden.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Leijenhorst, C. 2002b. “‘Insignificant Speech’: Thomas Hobbes and Late Aristotelianism on Words, Concepts and Things.” In Res et Verba in der Renaissance. Ed. Kessler, E. and Maclean, I., 337367. Wiesbaden.Google Scholar
Leijenhorst, C. 2007. “Sense and Nonsense about Sense: Hobbes and the Aristotelians on Sense Perception and Imagination.” In The Cambridge Companion to Hobbes’s “Leviathan.” Ed. Springborg, P., 82108. Cambridge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lennon, T. 2007. “Locke on Ideas and Representation.” In The Cambridge Companion to Locke’s “Essay Concerning Human Understanding.” Ed. Newman, L., 231257. Cambridge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lenz, M. 2010. Lockes Sprachkonzeption. Berlin.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Levitin, D. 2015. Ancient Wisdom in the Age of the New Science: Histories of Philosophy in England, c. 1640–1700. Cambridge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lewis, R. 2012. Artificial Languages in England from Bacon to Locke. Cambridge.Google Scholar
Limbrick, E. 1988. “Introduction.” In Sanches 1988, 188.Google Scholar
Lines, D. 2012. “Aristotle’s Ethics in the Renaissance.” In The Reception of Aristotle’s “Ethics.” Ed. Miller, J., 171193. Cambridge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lines, D. 2015. “Beyond Latin in Renaissance Philosophy: A Plea for New Critical Perspectives.Intellectual History Review 25: 373389.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Locke, J. 1975. An Essay Concerning Human Understanding. Ed. Nidditch, P. H.. Oxford.Google Scholar
Lojacono, E. 2011. Spigolature sullo Scetticismo: La sua manifestazione all’inizio della Modernità, prima dell’uso di Sesto Empirico: I sicari di Aristotele. Padua.Google Scholar
Lo Monaco, F. 2010. “Vulgus imperitum grammatice professorum. Lorenzo Valla, Le Elegantiae e i grammatici recentes.” In Lorenzo Valla: La Riforma della lingua e della logica. 2 vols. Ed. Regoliosi, M., 1: 5166. Florence.Google Scholar
Losonsky, M. 1994. “Locke on Meaning and Signification.” In Locke’s Philosophy: Content and Context. Ed. Rogers, J.. Oxford.Google Scholar
Losonsky, M. 2006. Linguistic Turns in Modern Philosophy. Cambridge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Luck, G. 1958. “Vir facetus: A Renaissance Ideal.Studies in Philology 55: 107121.Google Scholar
Lucretius, , 1982. De rerum natura. Trans. Rouse, W. H. D. and Smith, M. F.. Cambridge, Mass.Google Scholar
Lucy, J. A. 1992. Language Diversity and Thought: A Reformulation of the Linguistic Relativity Hypothesis. Cambridge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lupi, S. 1955. “Il De sermone di Gioviano Pontano.Filologia Romanza 2: 366417.Google Scholar
Lupoli, A. 2009. “Humanus animus nusquam consistit: Doctor Sanchez’s Diagnosis of the Incurable Human Unrest and Ignorance.” In Renaissance Scepticisms. Ed. Paganini, G. and Maia Neto, J. R., 149181. Dordrecht.Google Scholar
Mack, P. 1993. Renaissance Argument: Valla and Agricola in the Traditions of Rhetoric and Dialectic. Leiden.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mack, P. 2005. “Vives’s De arte dicendi: Structure, Innovations, Problems.Rhetorica 23: 6592.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mack, P. 2008. “Vives’s Contributions to Rhetoric and Dialectic.” In A Companion to Juan Luis Vives. Ed. Fantazzi, C., 227276. Leiden.Google Scholar
Mackie, J. 1976. Problems from Locke. Oxford.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Maclean, I. 1998. “Foucault’s Renaissance Episteme Reassessed: An Aristotelian Counterblast.Journal of the History of Ideas 59: 149166.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Maclean, I. 2006. “The ‘Sceptical Crisis’ Reconsidered: Galen, Rational Medicine and the Libertas Philosophandi.Early Science and Medicine 11: 247274.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
MacPhail, E. 2014. Dancing around the Well: The Circulation of Commonplaces in Renaissance Humanism. Leiden.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Malcolm, N. 2002. Aspects of Hobbes. Oxford.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Malcolm, N. 2012. “Editorial Introduction.” In Hobbes 2012, vol. 1.Google Scholar
Marenbon, J. 1997. The Philosophy of Peter Abelard. Cambridge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Marenbon, J. 2003. Boethius. Oxford.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Marsh, D. 1979. “Grammar, Method, and Polemic in Lorenzo Valla’s Elegantiae.Rinascimento 19: 91116.Google Scholar
Marsh, D. 1980. The Quattrocento Dialogue: Classical Tradition and Humanist Innovation. Cambridge, Mass.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Marsh, D. 2015. “Petrarch’s Adversaries: The Invectives.” In The Cambridge Companion to Petrarch. Ed. Ascoli, A. and Falkeid, U., 167176. Cambridge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Martin, C. 2011. Renaissance Meteorology: Pomponazzi to Descartes. Baltimore, Md.Google Scholar
Martin, C. 2014. Subverting Aristotle. Religion, History, and Philosophy in Early-Modern Science. Baltimore, Md.Google Scholar
Martinich, A. P. 1981. “Translator’s Commentary.” In Hobbes 1981.Google Scholar
Maxson, B. 2013. The Humanist World of Renaissance Florence. Cambridge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McConica, J. 1979. “Humanism and Aristotle in Tudor Oxford.English Historical Review 94: 291317.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Melanchthon, Philipp. 1846. “Erotemata dialectices.” In Corpus reformatorum. Ed. Bretschneider, K. G., 13: 509752. Halle.Google Scholar
Menn, S. 1998. “The Intellectual Setting.” In The Cambridge History of Seventeenth-Century Philosophy. 2 vols. Ed. Garber, D. and Ayers, M., 1: 3386. Cambridge.Google Scholar
Mercer, C. 1993. “The Vitality and Importance of Early Modern Aristotelianism.” In The Rise of Modern Philosophy: The Tension Between the New and Traditional Philosophies from Machiavelli to Leibniz. Ed. Sorell, T., 3367. Oxford.Google Scholar
Monfasani, J. 1988. “Humanism and Rhetoric.” In Renaissance Humanism: Foundations, Forms and Legacy. 3 vols. Ed. Rabil, A., Jr., 3: 195228. Philadelphia.Google Scholar
Monfasani, J. 2006. “The Renaissance as the Concluding Phase of the Middle Ages.Bulletino dell’Istituto Storico Italiano per il Medio Evo 108: 165185.Google Scholar
Monti Sabia, L. 1993. “Echi di scoperte geografiche in opere di Giovanni Pontano.” In Columbeis V. Ed. Pittaluga, S., 283303. Genoa.Google Scholar
Monti Sabia, L. 1995. Pontano e la storia. Dal De bello Neapolitano all’ Actius. Rome.Google Scholar
Monti Sabia, L., and Monti, S.. 2010. Studi su Pontano. 2 vols. Messina.Google Scholar
Moody, E. 1935. The Logic of William of Ockham. London.Google Scholar
Morison, B. 2008. “Logic.” In The Cambridge Companion to Galen. Ed. Hankinson, R., 66115. Cambridge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Morris Engel, S. 1961. “Hobbes’s ‘Table of Absurdity.’” The Philosophical Review 70: 533543.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Moss, A. 1996. Printed Commonplace-Books and the Structuring of Renaissance Thought. Oxford.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Moss, A. 2003. Renaissance Truth and the Latin Language Turn. Oxford.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Muratori, C., and Paganini, G. (eds.). 2016. Early Modern Philosophers and the Renaissance Legacy. Berlin.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Murr, S. 1992. “Foi religieuse et libertas philosophandi chez Gassendi.Revue des sciences philosophique et théologique 76: 85100.Google Scholar
Nauta, L. 2002a. “Hobbes the Pessimistic? Continuity of Hobbes’s Views on Reason and Eloquence between The Elements of Law and Leviathan.British Journal for the History of Philosophy 10: 3154.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nauta, L. 2002b. “Hobbes’s Views on Religion and the Church between The Elements of Law and Leviathan: A Dramatic Change of Direction?Journal of the History of Ideas 63: 577–598.Google Scholar
Nauta, L. 2006a. “Lorenzo Valla and Quattrocento Scepticism.Vivarium 44: 375395.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nauta, L. 2006b. “Linguistic Relativity and the Humanist Imitation of Classical Latin.” In Language and Cultural Change: Aspects of the Study and Use of Language in the Later Middle Ages and the Renaissance. Ed. Nauta, L., 173186. Leuven.Google Scholar
Nauta, L. 2007. “Lorenzo Valla and the Rise of Humanist Dialectic.” In The Cambridge Companion to Renaissance Philosophy. Ed. Hankins, J., 193210. Cambridge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nauta, L. 2009. In Defense of Common Sense. Lorenzo Valla’s Humanist Critique of Scholastic Philosophy. Cambridge, Mass.Google Scholar
Nauta, L. 2011. “Philology as Philosophy: Giovanni Pontano on Language, Meaning, and Grammar.The Journal of the History of Ideas 72: 481502.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nauta, L. 2012a. “Anti-Essentialism and the Rhetoricization of Knowledge: Mario Nizolio’s Humanist Attack on Universals.Renaissance Quarterly 65: 3166.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nauta, L. 2012b. “From Universals to Topics: The Realism of Rudolph Agricola, with an Edition of his Reply to a Critic.Vivarium 50: 190224.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nauta, L. 2015. “The Order of Knowing: Juan Luis Vives on Language, Thought, and the Topics.The Journal of the History of Ideas 76: 325345.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nauta, L. 2016. “The Critique of Scholastic Language in Renaissance Humanism and Early Modern Philosophy.” In Early Modern Philosophers and the Renaissance Legacy. Ed. Muratori, C. and Paganini, G., 5979. Berlin.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nauta, L. 2018. “Latin as a Common Language: The Coherence of Lorenzo Valla’s Humanist Program.Renaissance Quarterly 71: 132.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nauta, L. (forthcoming). “Two Treatises in One Volume: Kenelm Digby Between Body and Soul.” In Navigating the Old and the New: The Philosophy of Kenelm Digby. Ed. Adriaenssen, H. T. and Georgescu, L.. Berlin.Google Scholar
Naya, E. 2003. “Francisco Sanches le médecin et le scepticisme expérimental.” In Esculape et Dionysos. Mélanges en l’honneur de Jean Céard. Ed. Dupèbe, J. and Giacone, F., 111129. Geneva.Google Scholar
Newman, L. 2007. “Locke on Knowledge.” In The Cambridge Companion to Locke’s “Essay concerning human understanding.” Ed. Newman, L., 313351. Cambridge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nizolio, M. 1613. Thesaurus Ciceronianus. Frankfurt.Google Scholar
Nizolio, M. 1956. De veris principiis et vera ratione philosophandi contra pseudophilosophos. Ed. Breen, Q.. 2 vols. Rome.Google Scholar
Nizolio, M. 1980. Vier Bücher über die Wahren Prinzipien und die wahre philosophische Methode gegen die Pseudophilosophen. Trans. Thieme, K.. Munich.Google Scholar
Noreña, C. G. 1970. Juan Luis Vives. The Hague.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Noreña, C. G. 1989. Juan Luis Vives and the Emotions. Carbondale, Ill.Google Scholar
Nuchelmans, G. 1983. Judgment and Proposition: From Descartes to Kant. Amsterdam.Google Scholar
Ogilvie, B. W. 2006. The Science of Describing: Natural History in Renaissance Europe. Chicago, Ill.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ong, W. J. 1958. Ramus, Method, and the Decay of Dialogue. From the Art of Discourse to the Art of Reason. Cambridge, Mass.Google Scholar
O’Rourke Boyle, M. 1977. Erasmus on Language and Method in Theology. Toronto.Google Scholar
Ott, W. R. 2004. Locke’s Philosophy of Language. Cambridge.Google Scholar
Otto, S. 1983. “Rhetorische Techne oder Philosophie sprachlicher Darstellungskraft? Zur Rekonstruktion des Sprachhumanismus der Renaissance.Zeitschrift für philosophische Forschung 37: 497514.Google Scholar
Paganini, G. 2007. “Montaigne, Sanches e la conoscenza attraverso i fenomeni. Gli usi moderni di un paradigma antico.” In Scetticismo. Una vicenda filosofica. Ed. De Caro, M. and Spinelli, E., 6782. Rome.Google Scholar
Paganini, G. 2008. Skepsis: le débat des modernes sur le scepticisme: Montaigne, Le Vayer, Campanella, Hobbes, Descartes, Bayle. Paris.Google Scholar
Panaccio, C. 2004. Ockham on Concepts. Aldershot.Google Scholar
Panizza, L. 1978. “Lorenzo Valla’s De vero falsoque bono, Lactantius and Oratorical Scepticism.Journal of the Warburg and Courtauld Institutes 41: 76107.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Parkin, J. 2007. Taming the Leviathan: The Reception of the Political and Religious Ideas of Thomas Hobbes in England, 1640–1700. Cambridge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pasnau, R. 1997. Theories of Cognition in the Later Middle Ages. Cambridge.Google Scholar
Pasnau, R. 2011. Metaphysical Themes 1274–1671. Oxford.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pasnau, R. 2013. “Divisions of Epistemic Labor: Some Remarks on the History of Fideism and Esotericism.” In Continuity and Innovation in Medieval and Modern Philosophy. Knowledge, Mind, and Language, 83117. Ed. Marenbon, J.. Oxford.Google Scholar
Pasnau, R. 2017. After Certainty: A History of our Epistemic Ideals and Illusions. Oxford.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pasnau, R. (ed.) 2014. The Cambridge History of Medieval Philosophy. Cambridge.Google Scholar
Passmore, J. 1953. “Descartes, the British Empiricists and Formal Logic.Philosophical Review 62: 545553.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Patey, D. L. 1984. Probability and Literary Form: Philosophic Theory and Literary Practice in the Augustan Age. Cambridge.Google Scholar
Pécharman, M. 1995. “La Logique de Hobbes et la ‘Tradition Aristotélicienne.’” Hobbes Studies 8: 105124.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pécharman, M. 2016. “Hobbes on Logic, or How to Deal with Aristotle’s Legacy.” In The Oxford Handbook of Hobbes. Ed. Martinich, A. P. and Hoekstra, K., 2159. Oxford.Google Scholar
Penelhum, T. 1983. “Skepticism and Fideism.” In The Skeptical Tradition. Ed. Burnyeat, M., 287318. Berkeley, Calif.Google Scholar
Penn, J. M. 1972. Linguistic Relativity Versus Innate Ideas: The Origins of the Sapir–Whorf Hypothesis in German Thought. Berlin.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Percival, W. K. 1976. “Renaissance Grammar: Rebellion or Revolution?” In Interrogativi dell’umanesimo. Ed. Tarugi, G., 7390. Florence. [Repr. in his Studies in Grammar, Aldershot 2004, no. IV.]Google Scholar
Perler, D. 2004. “Was there a ‘Pyrrhonian Crisis’ in Early Modern Philosophy?Archiv für Geschichte der Philosophie 86: 209220.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Perler, D. 2006. Zweifel und Gewissheit: Skeptische Debatten im Mittelalter. Frankfurt am Main.Google Scholar
Perler, D. 2012. “Scepticism and Metaphysics.” In The Oxford Handbook of Medieval Philosophy. Ed. Marenbon, J., Oxford, 547565.Google Scholar
Perler, D 2014. “Skepticism.” In Cambridge History of Medieval Philosophy. Ed. Pasnau, R.. 2nd edition, Cambridge, 384396.Google Scholar
Peter of Spain. 1972.Summulae logicales. Ed. de Rijk, L. M.. Assen.Google Scholar
Peter of Spain. 2014. Summaries of logic. Ed. and trans. Copenhaver, B. P., with Normore, C. G. and T. Parsons, . Oxford.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pettit, P. 2008. Made with Words: Hobbes on Language, Mind, and Politics. Princeton, N.J.Google Scholar
Petrarch, . 2003. Invectives. Trans. Marsh, D.. Cambridge, Mass.Google Scholar
Petrarch, . 2017. Selected Letters. Trans. Fantham, E.. Cambridge, Mass.Google Scholar
Pico della Mirandola, Gianfrancesco. 1520. Examen Vanitatis doctrinae gentium. Mirandola.Google Scholar
Pigman, G. W. 2019. “Introduction.” In Pontano 2019, viixxvii.Google Scholar
Pinborg, J. 1961. “Interjektionen und Naturlaute. Petrus Heliae und ein Problem der antiken und mittelalterlichen Sprachphilosophie.Classica et Mediaevalia 22: 117138.Google Scholar
Poggi, D. 2018. “Locke and Syllogism: The ‘Perception Grounded’ Logic of the Way of Ideas.” In The Aftermath of Syllogism. Aristotelian Logical Argument from Avicenna to Hegel. Ed. Sgarbi, M. and Cosci, M., 105128. London.Google Scholar
Pontano, G. 1518–1519. Pontani opera omnia soluta oratione composita. Venice.Google Scholar
Pontano, G. 1943. I dialoghi. Ed. Previtera, C.. Florence.Google Scholar
Pontano, G. 1953. De sermone. Ed. Lupi, S. and Risicato, A.. Lugano.Google Scholar
Pontano, G. 2012. Dialogues. Volume 1: Charon and Antonius. Ed. and trans. Gaisser, J. H.. Cambridge, Mass.Google Scholar
Pontano, G. 2019. The Virtues and Vices of Speech. Ed. and trans. Pigman, G. W. III. Cambridge, Mass.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Popkin, R. H. 2003 (1960). The History of Scepticism from Savanarola to Bayle. New York.Google Scholar
Porphyry, . 1966. Isagoge: translatio Boethii. Ed. Minio-Paluello, L.. Bruges.Google Scholar
Porphyry, . 1975. Porphyry the Phoenician, Isagoge. Trans. Warren, E. W.. Toronto.Google Scholar
Potkay, A. 1994. The Fate of Eloquence in the Age of Hume. Ithaca, N.Y.Google Scholar
Priscian, . 1855–1859. Institutiones grammatice. Ed. Herz, M.. Leipzig.Google Scholar
Pseudo-Cicero, . 1954. Ad C. Herennium de ratione dicendi. Ed. and trans. Caplan, H.. Cambridge, MA.Google Scholar
Quintilian, M. F. 2001. Institutio oratoria. Ed. and trans. Russell, D. A.. 5 vols. Cambridge, Mass.Google Scholar
Rabbie, E. 1986. Cicero über den Witz. Kommentar zu “De oratore II.” Amsterdam.Google Scholar
Ramus, P. 1543. Dialecticae institutiones. Paris. [Repr. Stuttgart, 1964.]Google Scholar
Raven, C. 1942. John Ray. Cambridge.Google Scholar
Raylor, T. 2018. Philosophy, Rhetoric, and Thomas Hobbes. Oxford.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Regoliosi, M. 2000. “Le Elegantie del Valla come ‘grammatica’ antinormativa.Studi di grammatica italiana 19: 315336.Google Scholar
Regoliosi, M. 2010. “Usus e Ratio in Valla.” In Lorenzo Valla: La Riforma della Lingua e della Logica. 2 vols. Ed. Regoliosi, M., 1: 111130. Florence.Google Scholar
Reinhardt, T. 2011. “Galen on Unsayable Properties.Oxford Studies in Ancient Philosophy 40: 297317.Google Scholar
Ricken, U. 1994. Linguistics, Anthropology and Philosophy in the French Enlightenment: Language Theory and Ideology. London. [German original 1984, Sprache, Anthropologie, Philosophie in der französischen Aufklärung, Berlin.]Google Scholar
Risse, W. 1964. Die Logik der Neuzeit. Vol. 1. 15001640. Stuttgart.Google Scholar
Rist, J. M. 1994. Augustine: Ancient Thought Baptized. Cambridge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rizzi, A., and Del Soldato, E.. 2013. “Latin and Vernacular in Quattrocento Florence and Beyond: An Introduction.I Tatti Studies in the Italian Renaissance 16: 231242.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rizzo, S. 2002. Ricerche sul latino umanistico. Rome.Google Scholar
Robert, A. 2006. “Jamais Aristote n’a eu de connaissance d’une substance: Nicholas d’Autrécourt en contexte.” In Nicolas d’Autrécourt et la faculté des arts de Paris (1317–1340). Ed. Caroti, S. and Grellard, C., 113151. Cesena.Google Scholar
Robins, R. H. 1976. “The Current Relevance of the Sapir-Whorf Hypothesis.” In Universalism versus Relativism in Language and Thought. Ed. Pinxten, R., 99108. Berlin.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Roick, M. 2017. Pontano’s Virtues: Aristotelian Moral and Political Thought in the Renaissance. London.Google Scholar
Romanell, P. 1984. John Locke and Medicine. A New Key to Locke. Buffalo, N.Y.Google Scholar
Rossi, P. 1953. “Il ‘De principiis’ di Mario Nizolio.Archivio di filosofia 3: 5792.Google Scholar
Rotondi Secchi, Tarugi, L. (ed.). 1997. Petrarca e la cultura europea. Milan.Google Scholar
Rummel, E. 1995. The Humanist-Scholastic Debate in the Renaissance and Reformation. Cambridge, Mass.Google Scholar
Rummel, E. 2000. The Confessionalization of Humanism in Reformation Germany. Oxford.Google Scholar
Russell, B. 1959. My Philosophical Development. London.Google Scholar
Rutherford, D. 2005. Early Renaissance Invective and the Controversies of Antonio da Rho. Tempe, Ariz.Google Scholar
Ryle, G. 1932. “Systematically Misleading Expressions.Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society 32: 139170. [Repr. in his Collected Papers, 2:39–62. London, 1971.]CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sacksteder, W. 1978. “Hobbes: Teaching Philosophy to Speak English.Journal of the History of Philosophy 16: 3345.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Salmon, V. 1979. The Study of Language in Seventeenth-Century England. Amsterdam.Google Scholar
Sanches., F. 1955. Opera Philosophica. Ed. de Carvalho, J.. Coimbra.Google Scholar
Sanches., F. 1988. That Nothing Is Known. Ed. Limbrick, E. and Thomson, D. F. S.. Cambridge.Google Scholar
Sanches., F. 2007. Quod nihil scitur / Dass nichts gewusst wird. Ed. and trans. Howald, K., Caluori, D., and Mariev, S.. Hamburg.Google Scholar
Schliesser, E. (ed.). 2015. Sympathy. Oxford.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schmidt, G. 2009. Thomas More und die Sprachenfrage. Humanistische Sprachtheorie und die “translatio studii” im England der frühen Tudorzeit. Heidelberg.Google Scholar
Schmitt, C. B. 1967. Gianfrancesco Pico della Mirandola (1469–1533) and His Critique of Aristotle. The Hague.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schmitt, C. B. 1972. Cicero Scepticus: A Study of the Influence of the Academica in the Renaissance. The Hague.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schuhmann, K. 1985. “Geometrie und Philosophie bei Thomas Hobbes.Philosophisches Jahrbuch 92: 161177.Google Scholar
Schuhmann, K. 1998. “Skinner’s Hobbes.British Journal for the History of Philosophy 6: 115125.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schuurman, P. 2004. Ideas, Mental Faculties and Method: The Logic of Ideas of Descartes and Locke and its Reception in the Dutch Republic, 1630–1750. Leiden.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Seigel, J. E. 1968. Rhetoric and Philosophy in Renaissance Humanism. The Union of Eloquence and Wisdom, Petrarch to Valla. Princeton.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Serene, E. 1982. “Demonstrative Science.” In The Cambridge History of Later Medieval Philosophy. Ed. Kretzmann, N., Kenny, A., and Pinborg, J., 496518. Cambridge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Serjeantson, R. 2006. “Proof and Persuasion.” In The Cambridge History of Science. Vol. 3. Early Modern Science. Ed. Park, K. and Daston, L., 132176. Cambridge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Seuren, P. 2013. From Whorf to Montague: Explorations in the Theory of Language. Oxford.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sextus Empiricus, . 2000. Outlines of Scepticism. Trans. Annas, J. and Barnes, J.. Cambridge.Google Scholar
Sgarbi, M. 2013. The Aristotelian Tradition and the Rise of British Empiricism: Logic and Epistemology in the British Isles (1570–1689). Dordrecht.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shapin, S., and Schaffer, S.. 1985. Leviathan and the Air-Pump: Hobbes, Boyle, and the Experimental Life. Princeton, N.J.Google Scholar
Shapiro, B. J. 1983. Probability and Certainty in Seventeenth-Century England: A Study of the Relationships between Natural Science, Religion, History, Law, and Literature. Princeton, N.J.Google Scholar
Skinner, Q. 1996. Reason and Rhetoric in the Philosophy of Hobbes. Cambridge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Skinner, Q. 1998. Liberty before Liberalism. Cambridge.Google Scholar
Skinner, Q. 2008. Hobbes and Republican Liberty. Cambridge.Google Scholar
Skouen, T., and Stark, R. J. (eds.). 2017. Rhetoric and the Early Royal Society: A Sourcebook. Leiden.Google Scholar
Sluiter, I. 2000. “The Rhetoric of Scepticism: Sextus against the Language Specialists.” In Ancient Scepticism and the Sceptical Tradition. Ed. Sihvola, J., 93123. Helsinki.Google Scholar
Smith, A. 1982. The Theory of Moral Sentiments. Ed. Raphael, D. D. and Macfie, A. L.. Indianapolis, Ind.Google Scholar
Soles, D. H. 1996. Strong Wits and Spider Webs. Aldershot.Google Scholar
Solmsen, F. 1932. “Drei Rekonstruktionen zur antiken Rhetorik und Poetik.Hermes 67: 151154.Google Scholar
Sommerville, J. P. 1992. Thomas Hobbes: Political Ideas in Historical Context. London.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Soranzo, M. 2014. Poetry and Identity in Quattrocento Naples. Farnham.Google Scholar
Sorell, T. 1986. Hobbes. London.Google Scholar
Sorell, T. 1990a. “Hobbes’s UnAristotelian Political Rhetoric.Philosophy and Rhetoric 23: 96108.Google Scholar
Sorell, T. 1990b. “Hobbes’s Persuasive Civil Science.The Philosophical Quarterly 40: 342351.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Spade, P. V. 1982. “The Semantics of Terms.” In The Cambridge History of Later Medieval Philosophy. Ed. Kretzmann, N., Kenny, A., and Pinborg, J., 188196. Cambridge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Spade, P. V. 1994. Five Texts on the Mediaeval Problem of Universals. Indianapolis, Ind.Google Scholar
Sprat, T. 1958. History of the Royal Society. Ed. Cope, J. I. and Jones, H. W.. St Louis, Mo.Google Scholar
Stein Kokin, D. 2015. “Polemical Language: Hebrew and Latin in Medieval and Early Modern Jewish-Christian Debate.Jewish History 29: 138.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stewart, M. A. 1994. “Libertas Philosophandi: From Natural to Speculative Philosophy.Australian Journal of Politics and History 40: 2946.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stinger, C. B. 1977. Humanism and the Church Fathers: Ambrogio Traversari (1386–1439) and Christian Antiquity in the Italian Renaissance. Albany, N.Y.Google Scholar
Stump, E. 1989. Dialectic and Its Place in the Development of Medieval Logic. Ithaca, N.Y.Google Scholar
Subbiondo, J. L. 1992. John Wilkins and 17th-Century British Linguistics. Amsterdam.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sutton, R. B. 1953. “The Phrase Libertas Philosophandi.Journal of the History of Ideas 14: 310316.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tateo, F. 1960. Astrologia e moralità in Giovanni Pontano. Bari.Google Scholar
Tavoni, M. 1984. Latino, grammatica, volgare: Storia di una questione umanistica. Padua.Google Scholar
Taylor, B. 2016. “Definition and Ordinary Language in Cicero’s De Finibus 2.Classical Philology 111: 5473.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Taylor, C. C. W. 1990. “Aristotle’s Epistemology.” In Epistemology. Ed. Everson, S., 116142. Cambridge.Google Scholar
Thieme, K. P. 1980. “Nizolius’ Auseinandersetzung mit dem Wissenschaftsbegriff der Scholastik.” In Nizolio 1980, 720.Google Scholar
Tillmann, B. 1912. Leibniz’ Verhältnis zur Renaissance im allgemeinen und zu Nizolius im besonderen. Bonn.Google Scholar
Trapp, J. B. 2003. Studies of Petrarch and His Influence. London.Google Scholar
Trinkaus, C. 1979. The Poet as Philosopher: Petrarch and the Formation of Renaissance Consciousness. New Haven, Conn.Google Scholar
Trinkaus, C. 1983. “The Question of Truth in Renaissance Rhetoric and Anthropology.” In Renaissance Eloquence. Ed. Murphy, J. J., 207220. Berkeley, Calif.Google Scholar
Trinkaus, C. 1985. “The Astrological Cosmos and Rhetorical Culture of Giovanni Gioviano Pontano.Renaissance Quarterly 38: 446472.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tuck, R. 1991. “Introduction.” In Hobbes 1991, viiixxxiii.Google Scholar
Tuck, R. 1993. “The Civil Religion of Thomas Hobbes.” In Political Discourse in Early Modern Britain. Ed. Phillipson, N. and Skinner, Q., 120138. Cambridge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Valla, L. 1962. Elegantiae Linguae Latinae. In: Valla 1962, 1: 1–235.Google Scholar
Valla, L. 1973. Gesta Ferdinandi Regis Aragonum. Ed. O. Besomi. Padua.Google Scholar
Valla, L. 1982. Repastinatio dialectice et philosophie. Ed. Zippel, G.. 2 vols. Padua.Google Scholar
Valla, L. 2012. Dialectical Disputations. Ed. and trans. Copenhaver, B. P. and Nauta, L.. 2 vols. Cambridge, Mass.Google Scholar
Vasoli, C. 1968. La dialettica e la retorica dell’Umanesimo. “Invenzione” e “metodo” nella cultura del XV e XVI secolo. Milan.Google Scholar
Vasoli, C. 1974. “Intorno al Petrarca ed ai logici ‘moderni.’” I: Antiqui und Moderni: Traditionsbewußtsein und Fortschrittbewußtsein im späten Mittelalter. Ed. Zimmermann, A., 142154. Berlin.Google Scholar
Vickers, B. 1968. Francis Bacon and Renaissance Prose. Cambridge.Google Scholar
Vickers, B. 1985. “The Royal Society and English Prose Style: A Reassessment.” In Rhetoric and the Pursuit of Truth: Language Change in the Seventeenth and Eighteenth Centuries. Ed. B. Vickers, and N. Struever, , 176. Los Angeles, Calif.Google Scholar
Vickers, B. 1987. English Science, Bacon to Newton. Cambridge.Google Scholar
Vickers, B. 1988. In Defence of Rhetoric. Oxford.Google Scholar
Vickers, B. 1993. “Review of Werner Hüllen,Their Manner of Discourse: Nachdenken über Sprache im Umkreis der Royal Society.” Isis 84: 579580.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Vives, J. L. 1782–1790. Opera Omnia. Ed. Mayans y Siscar, Gregorio. 8 vols., Valencia. [Repr. London, 1964.]Google Scholar
Vives, J. L. 1971. Vives on Education. Trans. Watson, F.. Totowa.Google Scholar
Vives, J. L. 1974. De anima et vita. Ed. Sancipriano, M.. Padova.Google Scholar
Vives, J. L. 1979. Against the Pseudodialecticians. Trans. Guerlac, R.. Dordrecht.Google Scholar
Vives, J. L. 1987. Early Writings. Ed. and trans. Matheeussen, C., Fantazzi, C. and George, E.. Leiden.Google Scholar
Vives, J. L. 2000. De ratione dicendi / Del arte del hablar. Trans. Rodriguez Peregrina, J. M.. Granada.Google Scholar
Vives, J. L. 2011. L’insegnamento delle discipline. Trans. Del Nero, V.. Florence.Google Scholar
Wallace, W. A. 1972–1974. Causality and Scientific Explanation. 2 vols. Ann Arbor, Mich.Google Scholar
Walzer, A. E. 2003. “Quintilian’s Vir Bonus and the Stoic Wise Man.Rhetoric Society Quarterly 33: 2541.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Warren, E. W. 1975. “Introduction.” In Porphyry 1975, 923.Google Scholar
Waswo, R. 1979. “The ‘Ordinary Language Philosophy’ of Lorenzo Valla.Bibliothèque d’Humanisme et Renaissance 41: 255271.Google Scholar
Waswo, R. 1987. Language and Meaning in the Renaissance. Princeton, N.J.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Watson, F. 1971. “Introduction.” In Vives 1971, xviiclvii.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wels, V. 2000. Triviale Künste: Die humanistische Reform der grammatischen, dialektischen und rhetorischen Ausbildung an der Wende zum 16. Jahrhundert. Berlin.Google Scholar
Werlen, I. 2002. Sprachliche Relativität. Eine problemorientierte Einführung. Tübingen/Basel.Google Scholar
Wesseler, M. 1974. Die Einheit von Wort und Sache. Der Entwurf einer rhetorischen Philosophie bei Marius Nizolius. Munich.Google Scholar
White, M. G. 1978. The Philosophy of the American Revolution. New York.Google Scholar
William of Ockham. 1974. Ockham’s Theory of Terms. Part I of the “Summa Logicae.” Trans. M. J. Loux, . Notre Dame, IN.Google Scholar
William of Ockham 1978. Expositionis in libros artis logicae prooemium et Expositio in librum Porphyrii de praedicabilibus. Ed. Moody, E. A.. St. Bonaventure, N.Y.Google Scholar
William of Ockham 1990. Philosophical Writings. Ed. and trans. Boehner, Ph.. Revised edition. Indianapolis, Ind.Google Scholar
Winkler, K. 2003. “Lockean Logic.” In The Philosophy of John Locke: New Perspectives. Ed. Anstey, P. R., 154178. London.Google Scholar
Winkler, K. 2009. “Signification, Intention, Projection.Philosophia 37: 477501.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Witt, R. G. 1983. Hercules at the Crossroads: The Life, Works, and Thought of Coluccio Salutati. Durham, N.C.Google Scholar
Witt, R. G. 2000. “In the Footsteps of the Ancients.” The Origins of Humanism from Lovato to Bruni. Leiden.Google Scholar
Wood, N. 1988. Cicero’s Social and Political Thought. Berkeley, Calif.Google Scholar
Yolton, J. W. 1956. Locke and the Way of Ideas. Oxford.Google Scholar
Zak, G. 2015. “Petrarch and the Ancients.” In The Cambridge Companion to Petrarch. Ed. Ascoli, A. and Falkeid, U., 141153. Cambridge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar