MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W97587315 · doi:10.1353/sac.2003.0006

Gower’s “bokes of Latin”: Language, Politics, and Poetry

2003· article· en· W97587315 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueStudies in the age of Chaucer · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicMedieval European Literature and History
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPoetryLiteraturePoliticsColophonPresentation (obstetrics)ClassicsHistoryArtLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Gower’s ‘‘bokes of Latin’’: Language, Politics, and Poetry Siân Echard University of British Columbia THE HEAD of John Gower’s effigy in Southwark Cathedral rests on three books, their titles presented to the viewer as Speculum Meditantis , Vox Clamantis, and Confessio Amantis. While Gower’s three major works are in three different languages—French, Latin, and English— Latin here inflects the final presentation of John Gower’s oeuvre. Many would argue that Gower would approve; a more bookish poet could not be imagined, and to be litteratus in Gower’s day still meant to be Latinate . But Gower himself was highly conscious of his trilinguality. In the colophon Quia vnusquisque, which appears at the end of over twenty Confessio manuscripts, as well as at the end of five manuscripts of the Vox,1 the account of Gower’s books stresses the language in which each was composed. While there are some variations in the descriptions of the contents of each work, the sequence and emphasis are always the same: ‘‘First he published a book in French’’ (the Speculum, or Mirour de l’Omme); ‘‘The second book was written in Latin verses’’ (the Vox); and ‘‘This third book, which was made up in English . . .’’2 The structure of the Quia vnusquisque suggests two ideas. One is that Gower is a master of three tongues; the second, that he was evolving toward the use of English. 1 And possibly in more—there are quite a few manuscripts which now lack final folios. For a complete discussion of the treatment of the end matter, see my ‘‘Last Words: Latin at the End of the Confessio Amantis,’’ in Interstices: Studies in Late Middle English and Anglo-Latin Texts in Honour of A. G. Rigg, ed. Linne R. Mooney and Richard Firth Green (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 2003). 2 John Gower, The English Works of John Gower, ed. G. C. Macaulay (Oxford: Early English Text Society, 1901), 2 vols.: ‘‘Primus liber Gallico sermone editus . . .’’; ‘‘Secundus enim liber sermone latino metrice compositus . . .’’; ‘‘Tercius iste liber . . . Anglico sermone conficitur . . . ,’’ ii. 479–80. This is the third recension version of the colophon. For more on the differences between the different recensions with respect to the colophon , see below. 123 ................. 10286$ $CH4 11-01-10 13:53:22 PS STUDIES IN THE AGE OF CHAUCER This medieval version of Gower’s progress through the languages offers no overt evaluation, but I will argue that when Gower’s practice and his politics become tangled up with the assumptions underlying current discussions of vernacularity,3 we become limited in our ability to understand how he works through his own relationship to language throughout his poetic career. In particular, the politicization of the vernaculars —the casting of vernacular languages as challengers to the hegemonic authority of Latin—4 characterizes Latin in such a way as to predetermine our response to Gower’s Latin writing. Sarah Stanbury has described this trend in recent Middle English criticism as a tendency to ‘‘romance the vernacular,’’5 arguing that the association commonly 3 There is a wealth of recent scholarship on the relationship between Latin and the vernacular in medieval England. Some of this work appears in the notes below. I take the opportunity here to refer to some important critics who are not directly addressed later: these would include Christopher Baswell, Virgil in Medieval England: Figuring the ‘‘Aeneid’’ from the Twelfth Century to Chaucer (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1995); Rita Copeland, Rhetoric, Hermeneutics, and Translation in the Middle Ages: Academic Traditions and Vernacular Texts (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1991), and the edited collection Criticism and Dissent in the Middle Ages (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1996); John H. Fisher, ‘‘A Language Policy for Lancastrian England,’’ PMLA 107.5 (1992): 1168–80; David Wallace, Chaucerian Polity: Absolutist Lineages and Associational Forms in England and Italy (Stanford: Stanford University Press, 1997). Two collections are also central to current views on these relationships: The Idea of the Vernacular: An Anthology of Middle English Literary Theory, 1280–1520, ed. Jocelyn Wogan-Browne, Nicholas Watson, Andrew Taylor, and Ruth Evans (University Park: Pennsylvania State University Press, 1999), and David Wallace, ed., Cambridge History of Medieval English Literature (Cambridge...

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.

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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.845
Threshold uncertainty score0.246

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.063
GPT teacher head0.287
Teacher spread0.224 · 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