Diotimos Library · Journals, Notebooks & Fragments Collection · Bilingual Edition

Joseph Joubert

The Notebooks of Joseph Joubert, Volume II

Name: The Notebooks of Joseph Joubert, Volume II
Author: Joseph Joubert

Complete Notebooks · French with an independent English translation.

Explore the Lexicon

The Notebooks of Joseph Joubert, Volume IIYEAR 1815 · Entry 7396

Swipe or use the arrow keys.

English Page · Branch 3615 of 4529

YEAR 1815 · Entry 7396

Translator notesBook Mode

French

p. 7229

« Car nous ne possédons véritablement ces (on pourroit dire les) idées abstraites que lorsque nous les avons refaites nous mêmes; nous nous les approprions par là en quelque sorte. Et jusqu’au moment où nous les avons reconstruites, elles ne sont guères pour nous que ce que seroient les signes d’un langage que nous ne comprendrions pas. » (Frédéric Cuvier, Projet... pag. 60.) Donc, dans la méthode ordinaire, on donne la machine à démonter à l’élève. Dans le Pestalogisme, on la compose devant lui. Laquelle des deux méthodes exerce davantage et plus laborieusement c’est à dire plus utilement la sagacité de l’enfant? J’ai dit exerce, car prenez y garde il s’agit ici, d’exercer, c’est là le but. Il importe peu que l’enfant scache quelles sont les pièces qui composent telle ou telle idée, mais qu’il apprenne à le scavoir. Or, s’il est né pour y réussir, il l’apprendra tout seul, quand on lui aura mis la chose entre les mains. S’il y est propre, il est inutile qu’il l’apprenne.

The Notebooks of Joseph Joubert, Volume II: YEAR 1815

p. 7230

“For we truly possess these (one might say the) abstract ideas only when we have remade them ourselves; in this way we make them our own, in some fashion. And until the moment when we have reconstructed them, they are scarcely more to us than would be the signs of a language we did not understand.” (Frédéric Cuvier, Projet..., p. 60.) Therefore, in the ordinary method, the pupil is given the machine to take apart. In Pestalogism, it is assembled before him. Which of the two methods exercises the child’s sagacity more, and more laboriously, that is to say, more usefully? I said exercises, for take care: the matter here is to exercise; that is the aim. It matters little that the child knows what pieces make up this or that idea, but that he learns to know it. Now, if he was born to succeed in this, he will learn it all by himself, once the thing has been put into his hands. If he is suited to it, it is useless for him to learn it.

S1.Source editor’s annotationTheory of Pestalozzi, an educator of the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries.

T226.The complete quotation, internal these/the alternative, only condition, reflexive remaking and qualified possession remain. The following machine comparison and question stay in this same paragraph; Pestalogism preserves the visible local term rather than silently regularizing the name. Its source-editor call belongs after that word and before the comma. Only the alternative the and the later mentioned exercises, including its following comma, correspond to source italics; the earlier exercises in the question stays roman. The three more degrees, repeated exercise, knowing/learning distinction, future conditions and hands image remain. The literal source reads S’il y est propre. Its qualified but identifiable contours do not support an added negative or im- prefix, so suited to it retains the apparent paradox rather than repairing it. The abbreviated Cuvier reference remains unexpanded and unverified. English colon after take care is an openly supplied punctuation aid.

T246.The name and both century numbers translate the complete one-paragraph source annotation. The centuries describe the educator rather than date the notebook entry. This remains Beaunier’s apparatus, with its call after Pestalogisme and before the comma; it is not added to Joubert’s argument. The Roman century numerals have raised e endings in French; ordinary English ordinal words convey them without invented source typography.

T585.One continuous indented paragraph contains the quotation, source pointer and commentary. In the French source, the quotation closes after pas. with its period inside; the bibliographical period after 60 is inside its parenthesis. Projet... remains a printed ellipsis, not a reproduction loss. No external source is substituted for the printed quotation. Only les in the parenthetic correction is italic there; the later exerce, is italic through its following comma. Its first occurrence in the question remains roman. The raised source call 1 follows Pestalogisme and precedes its comma. The Pesta-/logisme wrap is complete, without silently adding lozzi to the main spelling. The left openings idées/nous/où/ce/pas/ordinaire/logisme/exerce/la/ici/quelles/apprenne/tout/propre remain identifiable in original-size color/native 363 despite thin or abraded strokes. The text literally reads S’il y est propre, with no im or ne supplied from expected logic and no positive additional word slot. All repeated first-person/plural/reflexive forms, negative restrictions, conditional and future predicates, future-perfect aura mis, comparative adverbs and knowledge/exercise distinction remain. Guères, nous mêmes, c’est à dire, prenez y garde, scache and scavoir retain their printed forms and spacing.

T586.The separate one-paragraph roman annotation retains Pestalozzi, the comma and two small-cap Roman century numerals with raised e. The main-text Pestalogisme spelling remains distinct. No new main paragraph or expanded identification is inserted.

About This Reading Edition

Joubert’s notebooks return to the work of thinking and writing, the demands of friendship, and questions of faith, beauty and conduct. This edition pairs the French with a new English translation, preserving the order of the chosen source and the unfinished character of its fragments. Dates and source references allow readers to follow a thought through time or return to its printed context.

Historical Text and Translation

The French text follows André Beaunier’s 1938 edition of Les Carnets de Joseph Joubert, published by Gallimard from Joubert’s autograph manuscripts. Volume II continues the notebooks and includes seventy undated pieces. French and English are aligned paragraph by paragraph, retaining the source order, printed dates and page references so readers can return to the facsimile.

About Diotimos Editions

Diotimos Editions prepared this new English translation directly from the French, preserving Joubert’s distinctions, recurring images, ambiguities and unfinished thoughts. Translator’s notes clarify wording, references and uncertain readings: Essential keeps notes that help explain a passage, while All includes technical detail. Annotations from the 1938 source edition remain distinct from the new translator’s notes.

Rights

The linked facsimile records identify the French source as public domain in the United States. The new English translation and editorial notes are © 2026 Diotimos, with source annotations and new editorial contributions credited separately. This edition pairs the complete French notebooks with an independent English translation, preserving the distinction between Joubert’s text and its accompanying notes.