ellauri090.html on line 116: Rubião misinterprets as a love offering a box of strawberries Sophia had sent him. At the Palhas’s house in Santa Thereza, he clutches her hand and makes his affection clear to her. Distressed by Rubião’s advances, Sophia suggests to her husband that they end their relationship with Rubião. Having borrowed money from Rubião, however, Palha is reluctant to break with him.
ellauri107.html on line 183: As [Arlin]Turner says in analyzing this letter, “[Melville] was aware, it can be assumed, of the inclusiveness and interwoven imagery of his letter, and no less aware of the meaning behind the imagery. The same awareness can be assumed on the part of Hawthorne”. Edwin Haviland Miller, who interprets Melville’s affection for Hawthorne as in part sexual, says that in this passage, “the most ardent and doubtlessly one of the most painful he was ever to write, he candidly and boldly laid bare his love”. Miller goes on to say that “when Hawthorne retreated from Lenox, he retreated from Melville. How Hawthorne felt his reticences keep us from knowing, but his friend wrestled with the problems and nature of the relationship almost until the end of his life”. Turner says only that “there is evidence through the remaining forty years of Melville’s life that he thought he had been rebuffed by Hawthorne, and that he felt a genuine regret for his loss.”
ellauri141.html on line 793: Francis Nigel Lee interprets Genesis 4:20 to mean that Jabal was both the "father of all cattle ranchers" and the "father of all tent-dwellers", and as such as the "pioneer of all livestock and agricultural technology" as well as the "pioneer of all architecture." Lee notes that Jabal was probably also a weaver, and thus "the pioneer of the clothing industry."
ellauri151.html on line 657: Wittgenstein first interprets Hamann’s ideas as a Russell-type paradox of signs and their objects in light of the logical problems he was discussing in his lectures: how God∈God? Wittgenstein then uses Kierkegaard to interpret religious symbols as paradoxes that express a higher truth. I argue that Wittgenstein
ellauri191.html on line 1159: "for her outstanding lyrical and dramatic writing, which interprets Israel's destiny with touching strength"
ellauri223.html on line 74: G.M. This seems excellent and sacred, but the community of women is a thing too difficult to attain. The holy Roman Clement says that wives ought to be common in accordance with the apostolic institution, and praises Plato and Socrates, who thus teach, but the Glossary interprets this community with regard to obedience. And Tertullian agrees with the Glossary, that the first Christians had everything in common except wives.
xxx/ellauri127.html on line 504: 13. Nathan interprets Coleman’s choosing to reject his past and create a new identity for himself as “the drama that underlies America’s story, the high drama that is upping and leaving—and the energy and cruelty that rapturous drive demands,” whereas Walter thinks of his brother as a “calculating liar,” a “heartless son,” and a “traitor to his race” [p. 342]. Which of these views seems closer to the truth? Are they both legitimate? What is Ernestine’s position?
xxx/ellauri165.html on line 495: The phrase "His Dark Materials" is a line from Book II of Milton's Paradise Lost, which you can read all about on Shmoop. ... In The Golden Compass, those "Dark Materials" presumably refer to Dust, which – as Lord Asriel tells us in Chapter 21 – the Church interprets as evidence of original sin.
xxx/ellauri166.html on line 227: the Lord shall have them in derision; which is a repetition of the same thing in other words; and is made partly to show the certainty of their disappointment and ruin, and partly to explain who is meant by him that sits in the heavens. The Targum calls him, "the Word of the Lord"; and Alshech interprets it of the Shechinah. Kimchi, Aben Ezra, & R. Sol. Ben Melech in loc.
9