Authorship Analysis and the Authenticity of Euripides’ Electra 518–44: Preserving Character Consistency

IF 0.7 2区 历史学 0 CLASSICS
CLASSICAL PHILOLOGY Pub Date : 2024-07-01 DOI:10.1086/730675
Nikos Manousakis, E. Stamatatos
{"title":"Authorship Analysis and the Authenticity of Euripides’ Electra 518–44: Preserving Character Consistency","authors":"Nikos Manousakis, E. Stamatatos","doi":"10.1086/730675","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"In this interdisciplinary study, a cutting-edge authorship attribution algorithm, highly accurate in testing the authenticity of very short texts, is used to examine the authorship of a passage in Euripides’ Electra, notoriously suspected of inauthenticity. There has been a long debate about the authorial nature of the anagnorisis discussion between Electra and Agamemnon’s old tutor in this Euripidean play. Is it a parody of Aeschylus? Is it, as it has been argued, dramaturgically inconsistent and even tasteless? Was it actually composed by Euripides? And if it is authentic, what was Euripides’ artistic aim in creating the scene? These and other relevant questions make Electra 518–44 possibly the most philologically intriguing passage in the play. On our part, we show that the passage is Euripidean, employing computer-based authorship analysis, also indicating that the textual difficulties/plot incongruities adduced to support the opposite are rather overemphasized pseudo-problems, and we conclude that it has much to do with Electra’s characterization in the play.","PeriodicalId":46255,"journal":{"name":"CLASSICAL PHILOLOGY","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"CLASSICAL PHILOLOGY","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1086/730675","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"历史学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"CLASSICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

In this interdisciplinary study, a cutting-edge authorship attribution algorithm, highly accurate in testing the authenticity of very short texts, is used to examine the authorship of a passage in Euripides’ Electra, notoriously suspected of inauthenticity. There has been a long debate about the authorial nature of the anagnorisis discussion between Electra and Agamemnon’s old tutor in this Euripidean play. Is it a parody of Aeschylus? Is it, as it has been argued, dramaturgically inconsistent and even tasteless? Was it actually composed by Euripides? And if it is authentic, what was Euripides’ artistic aim in creating the scene? These and other relevant questions make Electra 518–44 possibly the most philologically intriguing passage in the play. On our part, we show that the passage is Euripidean, employing computer-based authorship analysis, also indicating that the textual difficulties/plot incongruities adduced to support the opposite are rather overemphasized pseudo-problems, and we conclude that it has much to do with Electra’s characterization in the play.
作者分析与欧里庇得斯《伊莱克特拉》518-44 的真实性:保持人物性格的一致性
在这项跨学科研究中,我们使用了一种在检验超短文本真伪方面非常准确的尖端作者归属算法,来检验欧里庇得斯的《厄勒克特拉》中一段被怀疑为不真实的文字的作者归属。在欧里庇得斯的这部剧作中,埃莱克特拉和阿伽门农的老导师之间关于anagnorisis的讨论的作者性质一直争论不休。它是对埃斯库罗斯的模仿吗?是否如有人所说,它在戏剧上前后矛盾,甚至索然无味?它真的是欧里庇得斯创作的吗?如果它是真实的,那么欧里庇得斯创作这一场景的艺术目的是什么?这些问题以及其他相关问题使得《埃克雷特拉》518-44 可能成为该剧中在语言学上最引人入胜的段落。就我们而言,我们采用基于计算机的作者分析方法,证明了这段文字是欧里庇得斯的作品,同时也指出了为支持相反观点而提出的文本困难/情节不协调之处是被过分强调的伪问题,并得出结论,这段文字与剧中伊莱克特拉的性格塑造有很大关系。
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
CiteScore
0.70
自引率
0.00%
发文量
61
期刊介绍: Classical Philology has been an internationally respected journal for the study of the life, languages, and thought of the Ancient Greek and Roman world since 1906. CP covers a broad range of topics from a variety of interpretative points of view. CP welcomes both longer articles and short notes or discussions that make a significant contribution to the study of Greek and Roman antiquity. Any field of classical studies may be treated, separately or in relation to other disciplines, ancient or modern. In particular, we invite studies that illuminate aspects of the languages, literatures, history, art, philosophy, social life, and religion of ancient Greece and Rome. Innovative approaches and originality are encouraged as a necessary part of good scholarship.
×
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:481959085
Book学术官方微信