perdura, demora (EssaisConf)

El adjetivo jeweilig significa «cada vez», «correspondiente», «en cada caso» y, en la medida en que evoca el griego hékastos, también cabría traducirlo como «respectivo». Sin embargo, con estos términos se pierde de vista la dimensión temporal vinculada a la raíz Weile (instante, momento). El sentido de Weile, por cierto, se halla muy próximo al kairós griego, al instante oportuno, a la ocasión propicia, al momento adecuado. Por ello, traducimos jeweilig preferentemente por «en cada ocasión» con el fin de conservar ese carácter temporal, de resaltar la unicidad y la particularidad de cada situación concreta. Por otro lado, el prefijo je – que inunda por doquier todas las lecciones del joven Heidegger – indica que una estructura formal (como, por ejemplo, el ser-en-el-mundo, la caída, el uno o el ser-con-otros) tiene que realizarse en cada caso, debe desplegarse cada vez, se ha de ejecutar en cada ocasión de una manera diferente. En otras palabras, la estructura formal muestra un sentido particular que depende del modo y de las circunstancias en las que se actualiza en cada situación concreta. (Escudero, InformeNatorp, nota 6)

To linger (weilen) is to tarry or to “while” (stay for a while) in appearance, in between an emergence and a passing away. Heidegger’s principal concern over the whole of his lifetime of thinking was to show that an entity is always in some manner of movement or unfolding. Entities temporally “while” or “linger” or “abide” in their emerging and showing forth. Also, lingering characterizes the beingness of an entity, which had been traditionally set apart from its becoming.

For Heidegger, one of the most vexing issues left over from the metaphysical tradition of thinking was the relation of becoming and being. Plato’s tendency was to understand the prevailing “full look” of something, its eidos or idea, as what something really is (ontos on). The eidos or idea (later the essence) of something was thus construed to be the timeless being of the entity. Accordingly, the becoming of an entity was less being, if not non-being. Aristotle rehabilitated becoming to some extent by maintaining that the form (morphe) of a being draws itself into place through becoming the “what it was to be” (to ti en einai, Metaphysics Z, 4, later also understood to be the essence of something). Yet, still for Aristotle, following Plato, the form of something is the timeless being of the entity. (CHL)