'Voix' and 'parole': Interdiscursive Voice Regimes in French and Italian Meditation Literature from the 16th and 17th Century

在安理会的遄达（1545年至1563年）的后果，口头祈祷和精神祈祷之间的关系被重新评估：内心的祈祷应该给予优先。这个新公式，进入了《天特教理》，并发给了所有会众的牧师，将成为以下文学研究项目的起点。在反改革的背景下，内心祈祷与言语祈祷的增强和分离都给实践者带来了新的挑战：一方面，最重要的是，新的偏好意味着从（预定的）话语中相对“解放”；另一方面，这种新的自由所带来的，也是一种新的义务。个体从业者必须找到自己的话语和声音。我的研究项目首先旨在发掘这种新的自由和同时不确定的义务的文学和文化历史潜力。其次，将阐明在话语间语境（反语、歌剧、宫廷谈话、演讲）中三叉戟语态形成的后果。从区分或甚至标记自我创造和口授话语之间的区别的指控中出现的问题是否暗示了祈祷和冥想的文字化？内心声音和外在声音的区别在多大程度上导致了祈祷和冥想文学中与声音和声音相关的自我反思？谁的声音是在祈祷和冥想中发出的，它的美学品质是什么？该项目的创新之处在于，首先，它将冥想写作（如祈祷练习和诗歌）理解为表演文学，其次，它关注的是话语间的交叉，这是一种（显然）“专属”的声音形成的宗教过程。声音的特伦丁问题同时辐射到各种当代话语中。以同样的方式，它加强了声音制度的理论反映，声音的（实际）使用受到影响。更重要的是，当代声音制度和使用的多样性和相互联系的观点标志着内心祈祷声音的表演及其由此产生的文学潜力。对这一文化挑战的比较分析是一个主要的愿望，迄今为止只对法国或意大利进行了比较分析。该项目的重点将放在声音和话语的语义潜力上，其中两个主要的分析线索将被标记出来，它们通过相互依存和历史上可定位的声音制度联系在一起。项目A)将对导致法国和意大利祈祷和冥想写作（前）国家印记的文化归属进行比较分析；项目B)将处理语音性别的话题。需要指出的是，通过发出“女性”和“男性”（被掩盖或被挪用）的声音，产生了新的美学合法化手段。

In the aftermath of the Council of Trent (1545-1563), the relation between verbal prayer and mental prayer was revalued: inner prayer should be given preference. This new formula, that entered the Catechism of Trent and was issued to priests in all congregations, will be at the starting point of the following literary research project. Both the enhancement and the dissociation of the inner prayer from the verbal one brought about new challenges for practitioners in the contexts of counter-reformation: On the one hand and most importantly, the new preference implied a relative ‘liberation’ from the (predetermined) word; on the other hand, what followed from this new freedom, was also a new obligation. Individual practitioners had to find their own words and voice. My research project aims firstly at carving out the literary and cultural historic potential of both this new freedom and simultaneously uncertain obligation. Secondly, light will be shed on the consequences of Tridentine voice formation in interdiscursive contexts (retorics, opera, courtly conversation, lecture). Has the question emerging from the charge to differentiate or even to mark a difference between self-creating and dictated word suggested the literarization of prayers and mediation? And in how far has the distinction between inner-mental and external-vocal voice lead to self-reflexivity of prayer and meditation literature in relation to voice and voicedness? Whose voice is uttered in prayer and meditation, and what are its aesthetic qualities?The project’s innovative character is firstly its understanding of meditation writing (e.g. devotional exercises and poems) as performative literature and secondly its focus on interdiscursive crossings resulting from an (apparently) ‘exclusively’ religious process of voice formation. The Tridentine question of voice radiates at the same time on a variety of contemporary discourses. In the same way it enhanced theoretical reflection of voice regimes, the (practical) use of voice was affected. Much more so: It is the view of the variety and interconnectedness of contemporary voice regimes and uses that has been marking the performativity of inner prayer voices and its resulting literary potentials. The comparative analysis of this cultural challenge, that has so far only been conducted with either a focus on France or Italy, is a major desideratum.The project’s focus will be on the semantic potential of voice and utterance, within which two main strands of analysis shall be marked that are linked through interdependent and historically locatable voice regimes. Project A) will engage in a comparative analysis of cultural ascriptions leading to (pre)national imprints on French and Italian prayer and meditation writing; project B) will deal with the topic of voice gendering. It shall be pointed out that through uttering ‘female’ and ‘male’ (masked or appropriated) voices new aesthetic means of legitimization were generated.