Diotimos Reading Desk

Tap the page, move to the top or bottom edge, swipe down, or press Tab to reveal reading controls. Use the arrow keys or swipe sideways to turn pages.

← ExitThe Notebooks of Joseph Joubert, Volume II

Reading language

YEAR 1819

February 8.

To be ignorant of what one does not say. It is in being ignorant of what one says, [of the] thing one speaks of and about which one must speak, that [shame and] fault lie.

February 9.

Not everything is holy in the saints, nor light in enlightened [men].

February 10.

In examining themselves, the philosopher [seeks to] esteem himself, the Christian to despise himself. Now, since the mind [always] goes where the soul aspires, the former always finds grounds to applaud himself, to [excuse] himself; the latter, to condemn himself in the best faith in the world. But, [with the] same sincerity, the one who condemns himself is more clear-sighted and therefore [worth] more than the one who absolves himself.

February 12.

The circle, the straight line. The column, a succession of circles in a straight [line]. The circle is the most beautiful of figures, and the column is [one of the] finest solemn ornaments. And yet the barrel, which [is] also a succession of circular lines in a straight line, presents ridiculous [forms]. Why? and applications. Observe that the cippus is [beautiful], although it is short.

February 13.

In eloquence (as in gymnastics), one must [make] fluid and reduce almost to vapor everything one wishes to insinuate.

February 15.

Devotion beautifies the soul, especially the soul of the young.

February 17.

Neologism = paradoxism; paradoxism = neologism.

February 22.

Mind. The master mind and the working mind. The master [mind is] above its material, it dominates it, the material is within it, it [contains] it, so to speak, and holds it as though in its hand; it is [master] of it, cuts it, disposes of it and can even play with it. The [working] mind [is] dominated by its material, it is inside it, digs into it, hollows it out, [goes deeper into it], makes openings in it, but remains [imprisoned] there. The master mind is a goldsmith, a jeweler, an architect. The [working mind] is a miner, a mason in a quarry. The one works the material into shape, and the other extracts it.

The master mind is a coiner, a goldsmith, a jeweler, an architect; the working mind is only a miner, a mason in a quarry.

T25.The initial infinitive fragment, repeated ignorance, negative/positive reversal and duty to speak remain. Shame and fault are distinct. [Of the] is a contextual English phrase for the unresolved slot before chose; its whole bracket does not certify that both a preposition and an article were lost in French. [Shame and] broadly interprets hon[…] as honte plus a conjectured connecting et, neither complete in the witness. Intact le before tort has no separate article in idiomatic English fault. The two complete source sentences and final period remain.

T133.The complete 8 and infinitive opening remain. After dit, an incomplete curved remnant does not establish the missing determiner/preposition; the whole damaged slot is left open. After hon the remainder and any connector are lost; no complete honte or et is certified. Initial/terminal punctuation outside those gaps remains exact.

T26.The partial negation is not changed into a total denial of holiness. The saint/holy and light/enlightened relationships remain, as does the compressed second predicate. [Men] contextually completes ho[…] as hommes; the damaged ending is not certified. Enlightened renders intact éclairés outside the bracket.

T27.The different aims, repeated always, best faith, equal sincerity and resulting comparison remain. Finds grounds supplies an English noun for trouve à without changing the judgment. The unusual movement toward where the soul aspires and the final absolution remain. [Seeks to] broadly interprets cherc[…] as cherche with a conjectured infinitive link à; the bracket includes the English infinitive marker and does not certify the lost French connector. The first [always] interprets tou[…], while the second always renders complete toujours. [Excuse] contextually completes exc[…] within s’exc[…]; himself renders the intact reflexive s’ outside the bracket. [With the] broadly interprets av[…] plus a possible lost article, without certifying the slot’s extent. [Worth] provisionally interprets the wholly lost predicate after et through a value judgment, as in vaut mieux; more renders intact mieux and therefore renders partant. Other predicates are not excluded by the unreadable slot. The English semicolon after himself separates the two actors where source punctuation within the loss is uncertified. French eux mêmes remains unhyphenated.

T135.The complete 10 and unhyphenated eux mêmes remain. Right-edge limits are cherc[…], tou[…], s’exc[…], av[…] and a whole loss after et; incomplete adjacent strokes do not certify their endings, à/la or a missing verb. Their presence/extent is not reconstructed from syntax. The intact repeated toujours in the middle, meilleur/plus/mieux and partant remain.

T28.The first two nominal fragments, repeated straight line, one-of qualification and unresolved Why? and applications remain. Cippus retains cippe as an architectural term: the complete Académie entry of 1762 describes a half-column without a capital, formerly bearing inscriptions. It does not identify a particular monument. Grave describes the ornament’s solemn character. The first [line] contextually fills the slot between en and droite; the English a is ordinary article supply. [One of the] broadly interprets u[…] before plus beaux, without certifying the missing French words. [Is] fills the wholly lost predicate after qui, [forms] interprets fo[…], and [beautiful] fills the whole slot after est. All are contextual readings, not certified completions. The English comma after beautiful is supplied where punctuation within the source gap is unknown. English adds a comma before the barrel’s relative which; the source has no comma before qui but does have one after droite. French retains ornemens. All prose is roman.

T136.The complete 12, two nominal formulations and Pourquoi? et applications. remain. The faded openings/endings at the right edge do not certify a complete word after en, any letter after u in the following line, the word after qui, the ending after fo, or a complete b in the slot after est. All remain explicit gaps; no final comma is supplied inside the last gap. Literal ornemens and cippe remain; no modern architectural identification is inserted.

T29.The full parenthesis, obligation, almost, everything and material transformation remain. Insinuate retains the image of introducing something subtly, without adding a deceitful purpose. [Make] contextually interprets re[…] through rendre; intact fluide remains outside the bracket. French insinuër retains its qualified diaeresis on e. English adds a comma after the parenthesis and omits the source comma after vapeur before tout; neither change certifies punctuation inside the damaged verb.

T30.The repeated soul and especially remain. The young renders the plural jeunes gens without narrowing the group to men. The canonical spelling is embélit, with one l and an acute é; beautifies gives its contextual sense without normalizing the French spelling. The complete line is roman.

T138.The complete 15 and repeated âme remain. Both native 422 and original-size color show literal embélit, with an acute over e and only one following l; it is not normalized to embellit. Its ordinary beautifying sense does not certify a different French spelling.

T31.Both equality signs, the semicolon and the reversal remain. Paradoxism mirrors the unusual paradoxisme rather than replacing it with the ordinary paradox.

T139.The complete 17 and both equality signs, semicolon and reversed nominal equation remain. The upper numeral contours are lightly abraded but identifiable; no extra day is supplied.

T32.The opening fragments, paired minds, repeated material relations, so-to-speak/as-though qualifications and all occupations remain. Material is repeated in English where elle/la could otherwise confuse material with mind. [Mind is] broadly interprets espri[…] plus a conjectured lost predicate; intact master remains outside it. [Contains] interprets con[…]. [Master] interprets maît[…]; cuts it renders intact la taille under the shared English subject, without certifying a lost French il. [Working] and the separate [is] interpret damaged ouvrie[…] and a possible lost copula; intact esprit supplies unbracketed mind between them. [Goes deeper into it] is a broad contextual rendering of il[…]profondit, including intact verbal residue and a conjectured pronominal link; the continuing English subject is shared with its preceding verbs. [Imprisoned] interprets empris[…], with there rendering intact y outside the bracket. The later [working mind] jointly represents L’e[…] and […]uvrier across the page edge; The renders the intact article opening. These brackets disclose contextual readings, not exact French completions. The semicolon after hand replaces a source comma. The commas after contains it and master of it and the period after imprisoned there are supplied English punctuation at unresolved source slots. The final mettre en œuvre/exploiter contrast is contextual craftwork versus extraction, not moral exploitation. This paragraph continues onto 891 without a new break; the complete œu-/vre wrap has no additional loss. French au dessus is unhyphenated, and all prose and craft lists remain roman.

T140.The complete 22 governs two paragraphs. The first continues over 890/891; the separately indented Le maître esprit on 891 begins the second. No paragraph is inserted at the page edge and no repeated craft list is suppressed. The faded 890 residues are espri[…], con[…], maît[…], ouvrie[…], il[…]profondit, empris[…] and L’e[…]. None licenses recovery of lost predicates, pronouns or punctuation. Initial au dessus remains unhyphenated. The color/native 891 opening retains uvrier after an incomplete first oval, so […]uvrier is explicit; complete vre after œu- joins as œuvre without a new loss. The second paragraph’s prit after l’es- is degraded but identifiable; no extra gap is inserted there. Monnoyeur occurs only in the second list, with the restrictive n’est qu’un; singular un mineur/un maçon and the roman craft lists remain. All main text on 890 and its incoming 891 continuation is roman. The source specialist’s facsimile collation records the 890/891 right-edge losses, intact d/cer, literal embélit/insinuër, complete dates, incoming initial loss and two-paragraph ownership, with all stated individual reading qualifications retained.

T33.The separately indented reformulation remains a second paragraph; it is not merged with the preceding version. Coiner is added only here, where monnoyeur occurs, and only retains the restriction ne...que. The entire second paragraph is physically on 891 under the same complete 22 février date as the first. French monnoyeur and the unbroken, roman list are retained in the source; no extra gap or date is supplied.