Explore the vast range of titles available.

The second-century Polycarp is recognized as a witness to the text of 1 Peter, but his witness is not found in the Editio Critica Maior (ECM). Another second-century witness to the text of 1 Peter is Irenaeus, but only the witness of its Latin translation (IrLat) was cited in the ECM, despite the existence of an independent Armenian translation. In this article, I survey and resynthesize the criteria for identifying patristic quotations of the New Testament, apply them to Polycarp’s Epistle to the Philippians and Irenaeus’s Adversus haereses, and propose several updates to the patristic citations in the ECM for 1 Peter. Among these, both Polycarp and Irenaeus attest to a form of the text of 1 Pet 1:8 that strikingly disagrees with the critical text of the ECM and warrants further consideration.

The article focuses on the oriental manuscripts of the Biblioteca Nazionale Universitaria of Turin, their history and vicissitudes. The analysis concerns the formation, enrichment and fortune of the oriental collection over the centuries, with emphasis on the fire that struck the Library on the 25th-26th of January, 1904. The collection mainly consists of Arabic, Persian, Turkish and Hebrew manuscripts. The latter, recently subject of in-depth studies, are not dealt with in this work, so the others are the true protagonists of the survey. The aim of the research is to provide information on the current state of conservation of the manuscripts, also paying attention to the group of manuscripts destroyed by the fire. Following this path, the case of the disappeared Gospel written in Turk- ish by the Capuchin missionary Gabriele of Villa del Foro is indicative. His relationship with the Armenian Mekhitarist Congregation of Venice sheds light on the knowledge and the study of the Armenian language in Italy and Europe during the last decades of the 18th century.

Aujourd’hui le nom d’Antoine Meillet (1866-1936) rappelle surtout ses manuels de linguistique comparée des langues indo-européennes, ses études slaves et arméniennes, et sa présidence d’une « école de Paris » où seraient formés les grands linguistes de la génération suivante. Pourtant il ne faut pas oublier l’importance de ses contributions à la linguistique synchronique, y compris l’analyse de la langue française. Sa conception originale de la « grammaticalisation » dans un article de 1912, où il tire ses exemples clés du français, a démontré l’impossibilité d’une stricte séparation entre les catégories analytiques, et plus généralement entre la synchronie et la diachronie. Dans d’autres ouvrages il prétend qu’un Français conçoit un objet différemment de la façon dont un ancien Romain le concevait, à cause de la structure des grammaires latine et française ; que le passage de vocables d’un genre spécifique (tel l’argot des marins) à l’usage général est le principal moteur de l’évolution sociale d’une langue, et qu’il y a une hiérarchie quasi-féodale entre les mots selon leur origine ; qu’il n’existe en Europe que quatre « langues de civilisations », face auxquelles les autres langues seraient destinées à disparaître. Bien que Meillet ait joué un rôle cardinal dans le développement du structuralisme linguistique de la première moitié du XXe siècle, il a gardé ses distances avec le mouvement, et cette réserve, léguée à ses étudiants (à quelques exceptions près), clarifie certains aspects du caractère particulier de la linguistique française. Nowadays the name of Antoine Meillet (1866-1936) is mainly associated with his textbooks of Indo-European comparative linguistics, his work on Slavic languages and Armenian, and his leadership of a ‘Paris school’ in which the great linguists of the next generation were trained. Yet we should not lose sight of his important contributions to synchronic linguistics, including the analysis of French. With his novel concept of ‘grammaticalisation’ in a 1912 article, where the key examples are drawn from French, showed the impossibility of a strict separation of analytical categories, and more generally between synchrony and diachrony. In other studies he claims that a speaker of French conceives of an object differently from how an ancient Roman did, because of the structure of Latin and French grammar; that the movement of vocabulary items from a specific genre (such as the argot of sailors) into general usage is the principal driver of the social evolution of a language, and that a quasi-feudal hierarchy exists amongst words according to their origins; that in Europe there are only four ‘languages of civilisation’, in the face of which other European languages are destined to disappear. Although Meillet played a cardinal role in the development of the linguistic structuralism of the first half of the 20th century, he kept a certain distance from the movement, and this reserve, which he passed on to his students (with certain exceptions), clarifies certain aspects of the particular character of French linguistics.

Bullitta talks about the Visio Pauli. Few medieval texts feature the comprehensive, evocative depictions of the joys of heaven and the pains of hell as the so-called Vislo Fauli or Apocalypse of Paul. A New Testament apocryphon, the Visio Pauli was probably written in Greek in Egypt in the middle of the third century and translated into Arabic, Armenian, Coptic, Ethiopic, Georgian, Syriac, and Old Church Slavonic between late antiquity and the High Middle Ages, and notably Latin sometime between the fifth and the sixth century. The Latin text survives in at least twelve main redactions, which underlie virtually all European vernacular versions of the text.

Nowadays, the process of globalization resulting in the advancements of international relations and close cooperation in every field among individual states as well as the increase in the migration of people to various countries worldwide have conditioned the creation of multilingual societies. In this respect, the education system is not an exception and multilingual classrooms have become common at the educational institutions including HEIs. At Tbilisi State University multilingual classrooms mostly consist of the students of Georgian, Armenian, Azeri, Ukrainian and Russian nationalities who vary from each other according to their cultural, traditional backgrounds and religious affiliation. Their main problem for interaction represents the language barrier that is even more acutely revealed in the learning process. The necessity of successful implementation of this process poses new challenges to teaching English as a second language and sets the new objectives to English teachers in multilingual classrooms where the differences in students' learning needs and knowledge level are added the distinctions existing between their backgrounds. Having a good command of any foreign language means being perfectly capable of communicating, reading, writing and listening. Hence, the acquisition of a target language requires the development of all the necessary language skills of students. English teachers constantly seek for the new methods and approaches facilitating the process of learning the language. The goal of this paper is to highlight the importance of using supplementary materials as an effective tool providing the enhancement of strategies and techniques of teaching the second language - English in the multilingual environment. Despite the fact that modem English text books are complex and comprehensive encompassing the materials which are targeted at all the components of language learning, they still do not suffice to teach English in multilingual classrooms. The paper deals with the utilization of additional educational sources for developing learners' productive skill, namely, speaking as well as the strategy of selecting the supplementary materials and their integration with the course book for the purpose of fostering students' learning process and outcomes in multilingual environment. The paper also reviews the research which was conducted in the multilingual classroom with 12 students involved (5 -Georgian, 4 -Azeri, 3- Armenian students). The research method applied was a survey through the questionnaire to provide the formative assessment and the final exam (testing fluency and accuracy) through the interview and oral presentations for the summative assessment of students. The research findings confirmed the positive effect of using supplementary materials on students' learning outcomes, particularly, on developing the speaking skill in the multilingual classroom.