Stephen Partridge and Erik Kwakkel, Eds.: Author, Reader; Book: Medieval Authorship in Theory and Practice
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
STEPHEN PARTRIDGE AND ERIK KWAKKEL, EDS. Author, Reader; Book: Medieval Authorship in Theory and Practice Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 2012. ix + 305 pp., 11 plates In introduction Author, Reader, Book, Stephen Partridge characterizes this collection of essays that he co-edited with fellow Early Book Society member Erik Kwakkel as a conversation responding to two related phenomena of recent scholarship on Middle (1). Alistair Minnis's Medieval Theory of Authorship is first as well as source of much of theory underlying essays. According Partridge, joining history of a set of ideas developed largely in medieval Latin tradition with illustrations of that tradition's contact with vernacular writing, Minnis's book helped enable an increased sophistication in studies of medieval literature (1). Partridge goes on identify an increase in scholarly work on practical manifestations of medieval theories of authority, author, and authorship as second related phenomenon. Partridge continues by categorizing how essays respond these phenomena: some of essays read texts such as prologues and epilogues where authorial self-representation is an important enabling practice; others analyze ways in which ideas about authors manifest themselves in codices, construction of a single author manuscript collection, for instance, while still others examine author s interactions with her readers. Finally, Partridge identifies two persistent themes in essays: relationships between authors and readers, and between authorship and book. Alistair Minnis's essay, Trouble with Theology: Ethical Poetics and Ends of Scripture, opens collection. Minnis begins with observation that many crucial theoretical issues regarding exegesis of texts were developed and defined within exposition of Bible and only later applied secular literary texts whether in Latin or a vernacular. Theological thinking was not antithetical literary criticism, but rather a stimulus it, and, Minnis says, the converse was also true (20). Herein lies trouble. If end of both theology and poetry was drive men away from vice towards good, and both discourses used figurative techniques, then anxiety arose that theology, queen of sciences, was in danger of pertaining ethics, one of its handmaiden disciplines. Minnis proceeds trace this theological trouble through Prohemia poetarum of Thomas Walshingham, The Middle Commentary of Averroes on Aristotle's Poetics as translated into Latin by Hermann German, and poetics of Roger Bacon among others. He concludes that the fraught relationship between poetry and theology in late medieval thought has led us major underlying question of what sort of pedagogy great medieval schoolmen believed be appropriate Christianity (34), an issue that remained troublesome within history of church far beyond that time. Erik Kwakkel contributes Late Medieval Text Collections: A Codicological Typology Based on Single-Author Manuscripts volume in which he examines compilation in specific material context of Middle Dutch manuscripts. Kwakkel's essay takes as a touchstone Malcolm Parkes's suggestion in Influence of Concepts of Ordinatio and Compilatio that focused compilations, which Kwakkel terms collections, were produced in greater numbers in later Middle Ages than they had been previously. Kwakkel's primary interest is categorize composite manuscripts, which he defines partially as books that consist of multiple production units, a concept that has similarities with oft cited booklet, but which places greater emphasis on diachronic aspects of production. …
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 machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,001 | 0,003 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,001 | 0,002 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,002 | 0,003 |
| Communication savante | 0,006 | 0,007 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,002 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,002 | 0,003 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,016 | 0,009 |
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.
score_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 découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».