BASA

Anselm's debate with Gaunilo 39 « But surely in no intellect ... » which is comparable to Deane's « in no understanding » . 27 All of these renderings give the impression that Anselm's point is unduly person-dependent, that he is referring to what individuals can or cannot comprehend. Yet, a careful look at S I , 136:28-137:3 makes clear that intellectus in the phrase in nullo intellectu is sometimes an alternative for nullatenus intelligitur and nullo modo intelligitur. So what Anselm means is best translated in S I, 132:29-30 as: «But surely that than which a greater cannot be thought is in no sense (or: in no respect) that than which a greater can be thought ». And the line of reasoning continues: « Does it not follow, therefore, that if that than which a greater cannot be thought is at all in the understanding [i .e., is even partially understood], then it does not exist in the understanding alone? ». Since Anselm does not attempt to develop a vocabulary of technical Latin, we must be alert to his use of the one word intellectus in several different ways. In places he can interchange intellectus with cogitatio 28 or scire 29 or sensus, 30 just as he interchanges oratio with propositio in De Veritate 2, and essentia with existentia in the Philosophical Fragments 31 or with natura in Monologion 4 (SI, 17: 17-18)-though not supposing that these interchangeable terms have the same meanings in most contexts. Therefore, in translating Anselm's expressions we must avoid frozen renderings-i.e ., avoid mechanically using the same English word to translate a given Latin word wherever it occurs. Thus, sometimes 27 (1) M. J. CHARLESWORTH, St. Anselm's Proslogion (London: Oxford University Press, 1965), 175. (2) HrcK and McGrLL, 21. (3) John WrPPEL and Allan WoLTER, eds., Medieval Philosophy: From St. A ugustine to Nicholas of Cusa (New York: Free Press, 1969), 166. (4) S. N. DEANE, trans., St. Anselm: Basic W ritings (La Salle, Ill., 1962, 2nd ed.), 158. N. B. At S 1, 132: 14-15 «in nullo intellectu » seems best rendered as « not at ail in the understanding ». Cf. M 19 (S 1, 34 : 19-21 ). 26 Reply to Gaunilo 1 (S 1, 130: 12-18). 29 Meditatio Redemptionis Humanae (cf. S 1, 88: 110 with 88: 114). Cf. Gaunilo, On Behalf of the Pool 7 (cf. S 1, 129 : 14-15 with 129: 16). 30 Reply to Gaunilo 7 (S 1, 136:28-137 : 1). 31 Cf. 42 :32-33 with 43 :14-15. N. B. Gaunilo makes the same substitution in On Behalf of the Pool 6 (S 1, 128: 30).