| Co-Investigator(Kenkyū-buntansha) |
NAKAO Yoshiyuki Yamaguchi University, Faculty of Education, Professor, 教育学部, 教授 (10136153)
MATSUO Masatsugu Hiroshima University, Faculty of Integrated Arts and Sciences, Professor, 総合科学部, 教授 (40106787)
|
|---|
| Budget Amount *help |
¥2,200,000 (Direct Cost: ¥2,200,000)
Fiscal Year 1996: ¥300,000 (Direct Cost: ¥300,000)
Fiscal Year 1995: ¥1,900,000 (Direct Cost: ¥1,900,000)
|
|---|
| Research Abstract |
We have undertaken a comparison of the following four editions of Troilus and Criseyde : Benson's The Riverside Chaucer (Boston : Houghton Mifflin, 1987), F.N.Robinson's The Works of Geoffrey Chaucer (Boston : Houghton Mifflin, 1957), R.K.Root's The Book of Troilus and Criseyde (Princeton : Princeton UP,1926), and B.A.Windeatt's Troilus and Criseyde : 'The Book of Troilus' by Geoffrey Chaucer (London & New York : Longman, 1984). Benson's and Robinson's editions are based upon the Cp menuscript (Corpus Christi College, Cambridge, MS No.61). Root's edition is edited from the two manuscripts : the Cp manuscript and the J manuscript (St.Johns College, Cambridge, MS L1). Windeatt's edition is a copy-text of the Cp manuscript.
In this study, we have used the same method as we did in our Canterbury Tales project. It has been first necessary for us to make the four corresponding lines, taking one from each of the editions, after we have made Benson's edition the basis for comparison. We have left all punctuation marks intact as they appear in the original editions, because they may indicate the editors' different interpretations of Chaucer's syntax. In part I "Lines With Different Word Forms" of the present book, we have listed all the lines which contain one or more different words and spellings including upper/lower case differences. In Part II "Word Form Correspondence Index" we have made an alphabetically ordered word index to the sets of corresponding words. This index makes it possible to check every word set quickly and comprehensively. We are now preparing for "Cross-References" in order to make the comparison for each edition easier. The present list comprises the basic material for a further quantitative and qualitative study of the differences in spelling and vocabulary among the four editons. We have tried to make a contribution to Chaucerian texutal criticism by clarifying the textual similarities and differences among the four editions.
|
