1 / 21

The ‘ Electronic Hêliand Project’ : theoretical and practical updates

The ‘ Electronic Hêliand Project’ : theoretical and practical updates. Verona, 4th March 2010 Speaker : Marina Buzzoni Technical Support : Francesca Anzalone, Filippo Caburlotto, Damiano Bolzoni. This paper aims to.

conley
Download Presentation

The ‘ Electronic Hêliand Project’ : theoretical and practical updates

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. The ‘Electronic Hêliand Project’: theoretical and practical updates Verona, 4th March 2010 Speaker: Marina Buzzoni Technical Support: Francesca Anzalone, Filippo Caburlotto, Damiano Bolzoni

  2. This paper aims to • provide an overview of the often disregarded differences amongst the witnesses of the Hêliand(a ninth-century Old Saxon alliterative reworking of the Gospel). • show how, as against a printed edition which offers us a static text, an electronic edition presents the text in a variety of forms. • critically consider the process and progress of manuscriptdigitization within the ‘Electronic Hêliand Project’.

  3. The manuscript tradition The text of the Saxon poem has been preserved in two major manuscripts: M(= Munich, first half of the 9th century, http://daten.digitale-sammlungen.de/~db/0002/bsb00026305/images/index.html) C(= Cotton, second half of the 10th century). Fragments of the poem have survived in four other witnesses: V(= Vatican fragment, ll. 1279-1358); P(= Prague fragment, ll. 958b-1006a); S (= Straubing fragment, ll. 351-722, http://daten.digitale-sammlungen.de/~db/bsb00003953/images/index.html); L(= the newly discovered Leipzig fragment, found in April 2006, ll. 5823-70a).

  4. Stemma codicum(based on Taeger 1984: XXIV) O | A *CM *CP/L? *MS P/L? M S C V

  5. Witnesses and textual ‘mouvance’ • From the linguistic point of view: - the syntax of C seems to reflect an earlier stage in the development of Old Saxon. • From the theological point of view: - M conveys an over-orthodox religious message; - C (copied in England) seems to be less concerned with conveying such a message.

  6. Linguistic features • Doubly filled complementizer: l. 298b C: He afsôf that that siu habda barn undar iru M: He afsôf that siu habda barn undar iru • Lack of pronoun in anaphoric or expletive contexts: ll. 92b-93 C: gern uuas he suîđo, / that he ø thurh ferhtan hugi fremmean môsti M:gern uuas he suîđo, / that he it thurh ferhtan hugi frummean môsti • Case attraction in the relative clauses: ll. 267b-268 C: Endi ni kumid, / thes uuîdon rîkeas giuuand, thes he giuualdan scal M: Neo endi ni kumid, / thes uuîdon rîkeas the he giuualdan scal

  7. Codicological and paratextual elements The differences amongst the witnesses are of crucial importance in order to understand the specific use (and possibly re-use) of the text during the Middle Ages.

  8. M: Neums, stresses, corrections • Heliand, Ms. M, f. 5r; ll. 6-15; 288-302 • Heliand, Ms. M, f. 5r; ll. 21-24; 309b-314

  9. Ms L Ms P (IX secmed)

  10. Glosses(cf. Maria Rita Digilio, Thesaurus dei saxonica minora, Artemide 2008)

  11. C: Illuminations (f. 3) Annunciation of the Virgin Mary (f. 4v) Visitation (f. 5) Birth of Christ (f. 6v) Angels and the Shepherds (f. 7) Massacre of the Innocents (f. 8v) Presentation in the Temple (f. 9) Adoration of the Magi (f. 10v) Baptism of Christ by John the Baptist

  12. C: Pictures and analoguesNativity Cotton Caligula A.vii Liverpool ivory Benedictional of S. Aethelwold (c. 950) (c. 975-80)

  13. C: Pictures and analoguesAnnunciation Cotton Caligula A.vii Benedictional of S. Aethelwold

  14. The peculiarities linked to the actual use of the manuscripts within the Middle Ages deserve proper consideration while editing the text. A traditional paper edition risks hiding the communicative power of each witness. A traditional linear apparatus risks hiding “complex” linguistic and textual features, mainly because of its word-oriented (rather than sentence-oriented or text-oriented) structure. The electronic edition and its ‘added value’ Cotton Caligula A.vii, ll. 5764-5782

  15. Early choice (then dropped) <scribeapp> (scribal apparatus) <histapp> (historical apparatus) Encoding paratextual features

  16. Glosses <choice> <orig rend=‘interlinear’> <w>gitalas</w> </orig> <orig …> <w>lungras</w> </orig> </choice> Encoding paratextual features

  17. Corrections I Ex1. im`o´ <w> im<add hand=“corrector” place=“supralinear”>o</add> </w> Encoding paratextual features

  18. Corrections II Ex2a. uuelde (e  a) <w> <choice> <he : facs>uueld<del hand=“corrector” rend=“subpunction”>e</del> <add hand=“corrector” place=“supralinear”>a</add></he : facs> <he : dipl>uuelda</he : dipl> </choice> </w> Problem: the two forms (uuelde and uuelda) are both morphologically well-formed, while this encoding seems to suggest a prevalence of the second form over the first. Encoding paratextual features

  19. Thank you!

More Related