{"title":"Due autobiografie a confronto: Život i priključenija di Dositej Obradović e Žitije di Gerasim Zelić","authors":"M. Leto","doi":"10.36253/978-88-6453-979-9.07","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Dositej Obradović’s Život i priključenija is generally considered the symbolic herald of modern Serbian literature, a paradigmatic text which affected many later writers, including Gerasim Zelić. The paper compares Dositej’s work and Zelić’s Žitije focusing on three levels: firstly, it tracks the common topoi and the distinctive characteristics of the two texts; secondly, it discusses the ways in which Zelić reinterprets Dositej’s model, especially with respect to autobiography and travelogue; finally, it elaborates on the different yet cognate notion of authorship the two texts propose.","PeriodicalId":435997,"journal":{"name":"Biblioteca di Studi Slavistici","volume":"6 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"1900-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Biblioteca di Studi Slavistici","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.36253/978-88-6453-979-9.07","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
Dositej obradoviki的Život i prikljuenija通常被认为是现代塞尔维亚文学的象征性先驱,一个典范文本影响了许多后来的作家,包括Gerasim zeliki。本文主要从三个层面对Dositej和zelike Žitije的作品进行比较:首先,追溯了两篇文本的共同主题和各自的特点;其次,讨论了泽利奇如何重新诠释多西杰的模式,特别是在自传和游记方面;最后,详细阐述了两篇文章中作者身份不同但又同源的概念。
Due autobiografie a confronto: Život i priključenija di Dositej Obradović e Žitije di Gerasim Zelić
Dositej Obradović’s Život i priključenija is generally considered the symbolic herald of modern Serbian literature, a paradigmatic text which affected many later writers, including Gerasim Zelić. The paper compares Dositej’s work and Zelić’s Žitije focusing on three levels: firstly, it tracks the common topoi and the distinctive characteristics of the two texts; secondly, it discusses the ways in which Zelić reinterprets Dositej’s model, especially with respect to autobiography and travelogue; finally, it elaborates on the different yet cognate notion of authorship the two texts propose.