MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W2550536946 · doi:10.1353/esc.2004.0079

Cortigiana (La cortigiana) (1525) by Pietro Aretino

2004· article· en· W2550536946 sur OpenAlexvenueaboutno aff
Salvatore Bancheri

Notice bibliographique

RevueEnglish studies in Canada · 2004
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineArts and Humanities
ThématiqueRenaissance Literature and Culture
Établissements canadiensnon disponible
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésComedyDictionReading (process)LiteraturePunctuationComicsVernacularArtLinguisticsHistoryPoetryPhilosophy

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

Aretino, Pietro. Cortigiana (La cortigiana) (1525). Translated by J. Douglas Campbell and Leonard G. Sbrocchi. Introduction by Raymond B. Waddington. Carleton Renaissance Plays in Translation 38. Ottawa: Dovehouse editions inc., 2003. Pp. iy8. My first approach in reading this translation of Aretino’ s Cortigiana was to simply enjoy the comedy per se as a completely new creation, to take pleasure in what happened on stage, to laugh at the foolishness of Messer Maco and Parabolano, and to appreciate the dialogue, the freshness ofthe imagery, the language itself. I was not concerned with the original Italian version nor did I compare the efficacy of the translation: I read the comedy as a creation of Campbell and Sbrocchi, not Aretino. The language used by the translators definitely reflects the tone used by the Renaissance writer, the “range of diction, from high to low or, always a feature of daily life, the specialized vocabulary of the trades and professions” (20). What is not reflected in this excellent translation is, however, the “range of dialect and accents”(20) used in the comedy, from Sienese to Neapolitan, from Spanish to Sicilian. This setback, however, is inevitable; and almost as compensation, Raymond B. Waddington, in his introduction, dedicates two brilliant pages (19-21) to the analysis of the language in the Cortigiana. In my opinion, there is no doubt that this translation makes Aretino’s text more acces­ sible not only to an English-speaking reader but also to advanced students of Italian as a second language. This is mainly because of the almost 150 textual annotations (141-156), whose purpose is twofold: 1) to explain the numerous references to Renaissance history, people, events, allusions; 2) to justify the translation of difficult idiomatic expressions of that period or obscure lines that even a modern Italian-speaking reader would not have otherwise understood. This is definitely an act of philological recovery of the original text. The philological accuracy of the translators is also evident in the fact that they have chosen as the base-text the 1525 edition, a choice that is meticulously justified in Waddington’s introduction (“ La cortigiana in Aretino’ s Theatrical Achievement,” [9-10] and “the Two Cortigiana Texts” [11-12]). The 1525 edition, in fact, suits better one of the purposes of the Carleton Renaissance Plays in Translation series: that is, to keep the per­ former in mind as well as the reader. As stated by Waddington, The two texts differ substantially, reflecting Aretino’s altered circumstances in various ways.... Other changes are indica­ tive of Aretino’ s absorption in the print culture of Venice. La cortigiana ’34 has been described as a print text conceived for 244 IBancheri readers in contrast to the performance text of’25. It also takes care to spell out physical actions for the convenience of the reader who must imagine the stage scene (11-12). Theatrical vividness, adds Waddington, “is perhaps “the most memorable quality of the Cortigiana ‘25” (10), as in it Aretino anticipate techniques developed in the commedia dell’ arte. The scholarly solidity of the entire volume is also evident in Wadding­ ton’s critical essay (about 50 pages). This introduction is both concise and informative, written with both the scholar and the students in mind, as well, as mentioned before, the performer. It encompasses everything one needs to know in order to have an excellent understanding of the comedy and its political and literary setting during the Renaissance. Beside the sections mentioned above—Aretino’s theatrical achievement, the two Cortigiana texts, and the language of the Cortigiana—one will find a short biography of Aretino, an explanation of the title, a discussion on Commedia erudita and Aretino’ s attitude towards it in Cortigiana, a description of the Leonine Rome in 1517-27, a comparison between Castiglione’ s Book ofthe courtier and the La cortigiana, the presentation of Cortigiana as a virtual tribute to Pasquino and his pasquinate, an analysis of how Aretino’ s comedy is a mirror of Leo x’ s papal court, and a bibliography of primary and second­ ary sources. The explanation and interpretation of the title is perhaps a key section in understanding the organization of Waddington’s introduction. The fact...

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier

Prédiction distillée sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,000
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesaucune
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Sans objet · Signal consensuel: Sans objet
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: aucune
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,692
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,804

Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0000,000
Bibliométrie0,0000,000
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0000,000
Communication savante0,0000,000
Science ouverte0,0000,000
Intégrité de la recherche0,0000,000
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0000,000

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,017
Tête enseignante GPT0,223
Écart entre enseignants0,206 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.

Les modèles n’ont appliqué aucune catégorie : rien dans la taxonomie ne correspondait à ce travail.
Devis d'étudeSans objet
Domainenon disponible
GenreEmpirique

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations0
Publié2004
Routes d'admission2
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueEnglish studies in CanadaMême sujetRenaissance Literature and CultureTravaux en français237 207