排字工人的拼写偏好和《亨利六世》的完整性

B. Vickers
{"title":"排字工人的拼写偏好和《亨利六世》的完整性","authors":"B. Vickers","doi":"10.1093/library/fpad016","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\n The recent New Oxford Shakespeare Authorship Companion states that 2 Henry VI was co-authored by Shakespeare and Marlowe, citing an essay by Paul Vincent arguing that a change in the spelling of the interjection O/Oh showed a change in authorship. Vincent affirmed that ‘playwrights usually favoured one alternative far more than the other, and that the compositors of the First Folio regularly followed their copy text.’ He compiled a list of the variant spellings, arranged by Act and scene, identifying which compositors had set each section. Vincent argued that a passage corresponding to Act 3 in modern editions (the Folio is undivided) containing few instances of either O or Oh signalled an authorial change. When the evidence is arranged according to the sequence in which the two compositors set the pages, no consistent preference can be seen, thus disproving the case for Marlowe’s co-authorship.","PeriodicalId":188492,"journal":{"name":"The Library: The Transactions of the Bibliographical Society","volume":"14 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Compositors' Spelling Preferences and the Integrity of 2 Henry VI\",\"authors\":\"B. Vickers\",\"doi\":\"10.1093/library/fpad016\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"\\n The recent New Oxford Shakespeare Authorship Companion states that 2 Henry VI was co-authored by Shakespeare and Marlowe, citing an essay by Paul Vincent arguing that a change in the spelling of the interjection O/Oh showed a change in authorship. Vincent affirmed that ‘playwrights usually favoured one alternative far more than the other, and that the compositors of the First Folio regularly followed their copy text.’ He compiled a list of the variant spellings, arranged by Act and scene, identifying which compositors had set each section. Vincent argued that a passage corresponding to Act 3 in modern editions (the Folio is undivided) containing few instances of either O or Oh signalled an authorial change. When the evidence is arranged according to the sequence in which the two compositors set the pages, no consistent preference can be seen, thus disproving the case for Marlowe’s co-authorship.\",\"PeriodicalId\":188492,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"The Library: The Transactions of the Bibliographical Society\",\"volume\":\"14 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-06-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"The Library: The Transactions of the Bibliographical Society\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1093/library/fpad016\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The Library: The Transactions of the Bibliographical Society","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/library/fpad016","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

最近的《新牛津莎士比亚作者指南》指出,《亨利六世二世》是由莎士比亚和马洛共同撰写的,并引用了保罗·文森特的一篇文章,认为感叹词O/Oh的拼写变化表明了作者的变化。文森特肯定地说,“剧作家们通常更喜欢其中一种,而不是另一种,《第一对开本》的排字工人也经常遵循他们的文本。”他整理了一份不同拼写的清单,按照“幕”和“景”进行排列,以确定每个部分是哪位排字师设置的。文森特认为,在现代版本中(对开本是完整的),与第三幕对应的段落中很少出现“O”或“Oh”,这表明作者发生了变化。当证据按照两位排字工排页的顺序排列时,就看不出前后一致的偏好,从而反驳了马洛是合著者的说法。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Compositors' Spelling Preferences and the Integrity of 2 Henry VI
The recent New Oxford Shakespeare Authorship Companion states that 2 Henry VI was co-authored by Shakespeare and Marlowe, citing an essay by Paul Vincent arguing that a change in the spelling of the interjection O/Oh showed a change in authorship. Vincent affirmed that ‘playwrights usually favoured one alternative far more than the other, and that the compositors of the First Folio regularly followed their copy text.’ He compiled a list of the variant spellings, arranged by Act and scene, identifying which compositors had set each section. Vincent argued that a passage corresponding to Act 3 in modern editions (the Folio is undivided) containing few instances of either O or Oh signalled an authorial change. When the evidence is arranged according to the sequence in which the two compositors set the pages, no consistent preference can be seen, thus disproving the case for Marlowe’s co-authorship.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
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:481959085
Book学术官方微信