Interpolation as Critical Category

IF 0.8 2区 文学 0 LITERATURE New Literary History Pub Date : 2022-01-01 DOI:10.1353/nlh.2022.0000
Hannah Weaver
{"title":"Interpolation as Critical Category","authors":"Hannah Weaver","doi":"10.1353/nlh.2022.0000","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract:Maligned by ancient Alexandrian librarians and twentieth-century philologists alike, interpolation has a long history of negative criticism that obscures its ubiquity and utility in the medieval period. This article first tells the story of criticism of interpolation, using the Latin verb interpolare as a through-line across centuries of commentary. In this vision, the consensus is that interpolations must be detected in order to be eliminated. The trouble with this story is that deleting interpolations suppresses the very idea that texts were open to such interruptive revisions; by erasing embedded texts, these editors quietly do away with an important part of medieval textual culture. To get around this problem, the article then proposes an alternative story in which medieval practices of interpolation reflect flexible attitudes toward authorship and textual unity. Drawing on Derrida's idea of the parergon, I argue for the inextricability of so-called extraneous material from the work itself. Ultimately, interpolation is revealed to be an indispensable aspect of medieval textual culture that has been unjustly sidelined because of a long history of misunderstanding it as an attack on textual integrity, rather than as a deep form of interpretive engagement.","PeriodicalId":19150,"journal":{"name":"New Literary History","volume":"53 1","pages":"1 - 32"},"PeriodicalIF":0.8000,"publicationDate":"2022-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"New Literary History","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1353/nlh.2022.0000","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"LITERATURE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Abstract:Maligned by ancient Alexandrian librarians and twentieth-century philologists alike, interpolation has a long history of negative criticism that obscures its ubiquity and utility in the medieval period. This article first tells the story of criticism of interpolation, using the Latin verb interpolare as a through-line across centuries of commentary. In this vision, the consensus is that interpolations must be detected in order to be eliminated. The trouble with this story is that deleting interpolations suppresses the very idea that texts were open to such interruptive revisions; by erasing embedded texts, these editors quietly do away with an important part of medieval textual culture. To get around this problem, the article then proposes an alternative story in which medieval practices of interpolation reflect flexible attitudes toward authorship and textual unity. Drawing on Derrida's idea of the parergon, I argue for the inextricability of so-called extraneous material from the work itself. Ultimately, interpolation is revealed to be an indispensable aspect of medieval textual culture that has been unjustly sidelined because of a long history of misunderstanding it as an attack on textual integrity, rather than as a deep form of interpretive engagement.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
插值作为关键范畴
摘要:内插法在中世纪的普遍存在和效用上,受到了古代亚历山大图书馆员和20世纪语言学家的诋毁。本文首先讲述了对插补的批评,使用拉丁动词插补作为贯穿几个世纪的评论。在这一愿景中,共识是必须检测到插入,以便消除。这个故事的问题在于,删除插补会抑制文本允许这种中断性修改的想法;通过删除嵌入文本,这些编辑不声不响地删除了中世纪文本文化的重要组成部分。为了解决这个问题,文章随后提出了另一种说法,即中世纪的插值做法反映了对作者身份和文本统一的灵活态度。借鉴德里达的同伴观念,我认为所谓的外来材料与作品本身是不可分割的。最终,内插法被揭示为中世纪文本文化不可或缺的一个方面,但由于长期以来被误解为对文本完整性的攻击,而不是作为一种深层的解释参与,它被不公正地边缘化了。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
New Literary History
New Literary History LITERATURE-
CiteScore
1.50
自引率
11.10%
发文量
8
期刊介绍: New Literary History focuses on questions of theory, method, interpretation, and literary history. Rather than espousing a single ideology or intellectual framework, it canvasses a wide range of scholarly concerns. By examining the bases of criticism, the journal provokes debate on the relations between literary and cultural texts and present needs. A major international forum for scholarly exchange, New Literary History has received six awards from the Council of Editors of Learned Journals.
期刊最新文献
"Let me look again": The Moral Philosophy and Literature Debate at 40 Aesthetic Affairs: Art, Architecture, and the Illusion of Detachment Medieval Futures and the Postwork Romance Idols of the Fragment: Barthes and Critique Metaphorical Figures for Moral Complexity
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1