Work, Version, Text and Scriptum: High Medieval Manuscript Terminology in the Aftermath of the New Philology
Work, Version, Text and Scriptum: High Medieval Manuscript Terminology in the Aftermath of the New Philology
复制标题
作品、版本、文本和文字：新语言学之后的中世纪盛期手稿术语
DOI：
10.1353/dph.2013.0013
复制
发表时间：
2013
期刊：
影响因子：
--
通讯作者：
Tjamke Snijders
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Tjamke Snijders
本文回顾了用来描述手稿的术语框架。拉赫曼尼亚术语允许学者在纯文本的基础上将手稿归类为作品的版本或变体，但缺乏严格的指示器来指示手稿作为文本和材料考虑的单位(部分)。相反，采用达格奈的解决方案放弃工作，专注于材料圣经的学者获得了一个严格的指示符，但威胁要失去对手稿进行分类的能力。本文从一个案例研究出发，认为十二世纪关于作品本体论地位的观点使中世纪学者能够继续从文本和材料两个方面对他们的手稿进行分类。它探讨了使用达格奈的《手稿》作为新拉赫曼尼亚术语框架的基础的可能性，该框架允许学者在不丧失对它们进行分类的能力的情况下研究手稿的变异性和实质性。
This article reviews the terminological framework used to describe manuscripts. The Lachmannian terminology allows scholars to classify manuscripts as versions or variants of a work on a purely textual basis, but lacks a rigid designator to indicate a (part of a) manuscript as a unit of text and material considerations. Conversely, scholars who adopt Dagenais’s solution to renounce the work and concentrate on the material scriptum gain a rigid designator, but threaten to lose the ability to classify manuscripts at all. Proceeding from a case study, the article argues that the twelfth-century view of a work’s ontological status enables medievalists to keep classifying their scripta on both textual and material grounds. It explores the possibility of using Dagenais’s scriptum as the foundation for a Neo-Lachmannian terminological framework that allows scholars to study manuscript variance and materiality without losing the ability to classify them.