Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
This review discusses Tatjana Aleknienė’s Lithuanian translation of Plato’s Euthyphro, published in the series Philosophica. Klasikinių filosofijos tekstų ir studijų serija. After situating the volume within the broader context of Plato scholarship in Lithuania, the review highlights both the philological accuracy and the literary sensitivity of the translation, as well as the translator’s engagement with key interpretative issues. Particular attention is devoted to the rendering of central concepts such as ὅσιον and εὐσέβεια, whose semantic range resists straightforward translation into modern languages. The review also examines Aleknienė’s introduction and the appended essays, which address the reception of the Euthyphro in Clement of Alexandria and its comparison with modern theories of religion, notably in the work of Gintaras Beresnevičius. More broadly, the volume does not only provides a reliable translation but also invites readers to engage actively with Plato’s dialogical method and its philosophical implications.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Luca Gili (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: