MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4236363434 · doi:10.1353/smr.2012.0034

Tristan (review)

2012· article· en· W4236363434 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Shami Ghosh

Bibliographic record

VenueSeminar A Journal of Germanic Studies · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicHistorical, Literary, and Cultural Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGermanSubject (documents)ArtArt historyLiteratureClassicsHistoryPhilosophyHumanitiesLinguisticsComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Reviewed by: Tristan Shami Ghosh Gottfried von Strassburg . Tristan. Walter Haug and Manfred Günther Scholz, eds. and trans. Bibliothek des Mittelalters, Vol. 11. Frankfurt: Deutscher Klassiker Verlag, 2011. 2 vols, 1089 + 939 pp. € 168.00. ISBN 978-3-618-66100-9. Gottfried von Straßburg's Tristan is one of the best-known literary works from medieval Germany; among the most popular texts of its own time, it has - like Wolfram von Eschenbach's Parzival and the Nibelungenlied, but unlike most other medieval German works - also enjoyed a significant modern reception in various media, most prominently in the operas of Richard Wagner. A new edition of Tristan is therefore something of an event in the world of Altgermanistik. Despite the eleven complete and seventeen fragmentary witnesses, modern scholars are in agreement that the manuscript transmission of Tristan presents a text that is relatively "fixed." This makes it all the more disconcerting to note that despite all the scholarly energy expended on this text, like Parzival, Tristan too has yet to be presented in a modern critical edition. The two volumes under review provide a new edition of Tristan; this is coupled with an edition of the fragment of Gottfried's source, Thomas's Tristran et Ysolt, line-by-line (but prose) translations of both, extensive commentaries and bibliography, subject and name indices, and brief introductions to both works. Tristan has a complicated editorial history. The oldest text still considered usable is that of Reinhold Bechstein, first published in 1869/70 and revised and reissued by Peter Ganz in 1978; this is no longer in print. Bechstein/Ganz has no translation but does provide extensive linguistic notes and a glossary and is thus still a very useful edition for didactic purposes. Bechstein's text had, however, already been superseded by that of Friedrich Ranke, first published in 1930 and still in print along with a translation and commentary by Rüdiger Krohn (from 1980; last updated in 2002); Ranke's Tristan has generally been the edition cited by the scholarship of the past several decades. Ranke published it simply as a text, however, with no apparatus, nor even proper discussion of the editorial principles by which he had arrived at his text. His edition was rapidly accepted, in large part because Ranke had earlier published an extensive critique (still fundamental for work on Tristan's manuscript tradition), along with collations of the major manuscript witnesses, of a third edition, that of Karl Marold (1906). Because of the relative uniformity of the tradition, Ranke's own edition resulted in a text not very different from Marold's, a fact reflected in the reissuing of Marold's edition in 1969, in which the apparatus was thoroughly revamped by Werner Schröder on the basis of Ranke's critique and collations. This has since been further revised and reprinted in two volumes in 2004, along with a [End Page 490] translation by Peter Knecht, an updated afterword by Schröder, and a new introduction by Tomas Tomasek. The competition for Haug and Scholz's edition is, therefore, Ranke/Krohn (Reclam paperback; lacking an apparatus but with a commentary), and Marold/Schröder (de Gruyter paperback; provided with an apparatus, albeit a flawed one, and no commentary). Haug/Scholz is based on a thorough reassessment of the manuscript evidence; the text, however, is by the editors' admission essentially identical to that of Ranke, with only twenty-nine divergences from his text (many of which were already present in Marold/Schröder). None of these will have particularly significant consequences for the way we read Tristan; the only differences of note, in my view, occur at line 1: Gedenket for Gedæhte; line 2: den for dem; line 458: niuwe for niuwan; line 1,652: gewerdet for gewerldet; line 6,444: breche for enbreche; and the dispatching of the irritating and incomprehensible danne Setmunt of line 12,216, to be replaced by dan ie seite munt. In addition, the word wildenære has consistently been banished in favour of wilderære. The new edition also provides accent markings (lacking in Ranke but provided by Krohn and Schröder) and punctuation that occasionally diverges from that...

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.615
Threshold uncertainty score0.558

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.079
GPT teacher head0.314
Teacher spread0.235 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSeminar A Journal of Germanic StudiesSame topicHistorical, Literary, and Cultural StudiesFrench-language works237,207