Personal Poetics: An Adapted Version of a Well-Known Treatise in Old Tamil

Eva Wilden
{"title":"Personal Poetics: An Adapted Version of a Well-Known Treatise in Old Tamil","authors":"Eva Wilden","doi":"10.1515/9783110741124-020","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":": This article is a case study of one text in a multiple-text manuscript of grammatical works in Old Tamil, now kept in the Mahārājā Serfoji Sarasvatī Mahāl Library in Tañcāvūr under shelf mark 631. It gives a personal (or local?) adaptation of a well-known and important treatise on poetics, the Iṟaiyaṉār Akapporuḷ (seventh century?), normally transmitted together with the even more famous commentary by Nakkīraṉ (ninth century?), whom many regard as the founder of the Tamil tradition of theoretical commentary. The text deviates from the canonised standard version in the number of sūtras (aphorisms) it contains and, in the order in which they are listed, some sūtras having been omitted and others added to it. The provenance of the extra sūtras is clearly part of the reper- toire of anonymous quotations from older, partly lost treatises on poetics that are found within Nakkīraṉ’s commentary, thus proving that the author-copyist of the manuscript was well acquainted with the commentary and deliberately chose not to copy it along with the text. His purpose may have been to teach akam (love) poetics to his students. His choice of additions was probably motivated by what was perceived as lacunae in the standard text with respect to one important application of poetic theory, namely the writing of miniature commentaries elu- cidating the speech situations encountered in a single poem ( kiḷavi , later koḷu ) for classical poetry. This was an activity demonstrably still pursued by copyists as late as the nineteenth century, most likely in connection with one of the later poetic genres, the kōvai , the kind of poetic text that corresponded most closely to the treatise and that was alive until then.","PeriodicalId":103492,"journal":{"name":"Education Materialised","volume":"41 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-06-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Education Materialised","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110741124-020","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

: This article is a case study of one text in a multiple-text manuscript of grammatical works in Old Tamil, now kept in the Mahārājā Serfoji Sarasvatī Mahāl Library in Tañcāvūr under shelf mark 631. It gives a personal (or local?) adaptation of a well-known and important treatise on poetics, the Iṟaiyaṉār Akapporuḷ (seventh century?), normally transmitted together with the even more famous commentary by Nakkīraṉ (ninth century?), whom many regard as the founder of the Tamil tradition of theoretical commentary. The text deviates from the canonised standard version in the number of sūtras (aphorisms) it contains and, in the order in which they are listed, some sūtras having been omitted and others added to it. The provenance of the extra sūtras is clearly part of the reper- toire of anonymous quotations from older, partly lost treatises on poetics that are found within Nakkīraṉ’s commentary, thus proving that the author-copyist of the manuscript was well acquainted with the commentary and deliberately chose not to copy it along with the text. His purpose may have been to teach akam (love) poetics to his students. His choice of additions was probably motivated by what was perceived as lacunae in the standard text with respect to one important application of poetic theory, namely the writing of miniature commentaries elu- cidating the speech situations encountered in a single poem ( kiḷavi , later koḷu ) for classical poetry. This was an activity demonstrably still pursued by copyists as late as the nineteenth century, most likely in connection with one of the later poetic genres, the kōvai , the kind of poetic text that corresponded most closely to the treatise and that was alive until then.
个人诗学:古泰米尔语一篇著名论文的改编版
本文是古泰米尔语语法作品多文本手稿中的一个文本的案例研究,现在保存在Tañcāvūr的Mahārājā Serfoji sarasvat Mahāl图书馆,架子标记为631。它提供了一个个人的(或地方的?)改编的一个著名的和重要的诗学论文,Iṟaiyaṉār akapporuva(七世纪?),通常与更著名的nakk拉(九世纪?)的评论一起传播,许多人认为他是泰米尔传统的理论评论的创始人。该文本在包含sūtras(格言)的数量上偏离了标准版本,在它们列出的顺序上,一些sūtras被省略,而另一些被添加进去。这个额外的sūtras的出处显然是在nakk拉的注释中发现的一些古老的、部分丢失的诗学论文的匿名引用的一部分,从而证明了手稿的作者抄写者对注释非常熟悉,并故意选择不把它和文本一起抄写。他的目的可能是教他的学生爱诗学。他选择补充的动机可能是被认为是标准文本中关于诗歌理论的一个重要应用的空白,即微型注释的写作,为古典诗歌删除一首诗(kiḷavi,后来koḷu)中遇到的演讲情况。很明显,直到19世纪,抄写员仍在从事这一活动,很可能与后来的一种诗歌体裁有关,kōvai,这种诗歌文本与论文最接近,直到那时还存在。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信