MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W4386903477 · doi:10.1353/chy.2022.0041

Reading Old English Biblical Poetry: The Book and the Poem in Junius 11 by Janet Schrunk Ericksen (review)

2022· article· en· W4386903477 sur OpenAlex

Pourquoi ce travail est dans la base

Une base qui oublie comment elle a trouvé un travail ne peut pas être vérifiée. Voici les voies qui ont admis celui-ci.

aboutLe titre ou le résumé porte un signal canadien du lexique géographique.
no affAucune affiliation canadienne : ce travail est invisible pour une base fondée sur la seule affiliation.
Aucune affiliation canadienne. Une base fondée sur la seule affiliation (le devis habituel) n'aurait jamais vu ce travail. C'est l'un des travaux qui justifient l'inversion de la base.

Notice bibliographique

RevueChristianity & Literature · 2022
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineArts and Humanities
ThématiqueMedieval Literature and History
Établissements canadiensnon disponible
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésPoetryReading (process)ScholarshipLiteratureAudience measurementArtPhilosophyHistoryLinguisticsLaw

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

Reviewed by: Reading Old English Biblical Poetry: The Book and the Poem in Junius 11 by Janet Schrunk Ericksen Jodi Grimes Reading Old English Biblical Poetry: The Book and the Poem in Junius 11. By Janet Schrunk Ericksen. Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 2021. ISBN 978-1-4875-0746-6. Pp. x + 222. $65.00. "We do not know when and why the poems in Junius 11 were first brought together" (68). This sort of statement, appearing all too often in medieval scholarship, can be both frustrating and mysterious, off-putting and inviting. We do not know: who wrote it, when it was written, for whom it was written, where it was produced. In medieval texts, clues hinting at answers to these questions abound in a manuscript's transmission history, margin markings, and in echoes of the contents observed in other texts. The mysteries of authorship, provenance, readership, and purpose are in part what make medieval studies infinitely intriguing, at least for those scholars who can be comfortable in the knowledge that many of these secrets are forever dissolved with the past. But what of reading's future, given the [End Page 447] digital texts that leave fewer physical traces than the fading manuscripts of a past age? How do we consume paragraphs with all our modern distractions? Do we tend to read less sequentially, skip to the end of a book, or perhaps even read only the first few sentences and turn to another less taxing pastime? For contemporary readers who are concerned with these issues, alongside the many other unknowns that have so many of us in higher education wondering if the liberal arts will survive this next generation of reader-surfer-scrollers, Janet Schrunk Ericksen's Reading Old English Biblical Poetry: The Book and the Poem in Junius 11 may serve both as comfort and inspiration. Ericksen's monograph is the scholarly story of a tenth-century book, one of only four extant codices of Old English poetry and the only manuscript that is illustrated. This unique treasure adapts several key narratives from the Old and New Testament in forty-eight illustrations and four Old English poems, now named Genesis A and B, Exodus, Daniel, and Christ and Satan. MS Junius 11 exists in almost original form a millennium after its creation and may be studied at the University of Oxford's Bodleian Library or digitally from anywhere in the world. However, it first was edited and published by Franciscus Junius in the seventeenth century as the work of Caedmon, the illiterate cowherd whom according to Bede was the first to compose scriptural poetry in the English vernacular. While several scholars have worked with this manuscript, notably Herbert Broderick, Catherine Karkov, A. N. Doane, Barbara Raw, and Leslie Lockett, Ericksen's full-length study is a welcome addition to the body of scholarship, and in its consideration of MS Junius 11 as "a model for reading and meaning-building" (32), it has applications for contemporary reading as well. An associate professor of English and medieval studies at the University of Minnesota, Morris, Ericksen connects the science of reading with a study of the Junius manuscript to argue that medieval readers may have been much more fluid in their approach to texts than modern readers (I would qualify, more than modern readers trained before the flourishing of digital texts). The poems of the manuscript can be read sequentially or in isolation, Ericksen argues, moving either within the text or leading outward. Using the metaphor of various entry points to a home, Ericksen explains that the book "starts to reveal an array of interests, connections, and approaches to understanding that were available to its early readers and perhaps sought after by them even more frequently than was sequential unity" (6). Through her careful analysis of each of the poems and the manuscript's likely library context, Ericksen builds a case that MS Junius 11 encouraged reading flexibility. Ericksen's introduction surveys various theories about the Junius manuscript's purpose and audience and compares it to other similar surviving manuscripts to show that "the extent of congruence between a set of connectable narratives and a book as a whole was...

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.

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)0,001
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesCharge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Sans objet · Signal consensuel: Sans objet
GenreSignal candidat: Synthèse · Signal consensuel: aucune
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,818
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,998

Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0010,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0000,000
Bibliométrie0,0000,000
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0010,001
Communication savante0,0010,000
Science ouverte0,0010,000
Intégrité de la recherche0,0000,002
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0030,000

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 Opus0,007
Tête enseignante GPT0,195
Écart entre enseignants0,188 · 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