Krytyka tekstu i teoria dzieła. Jerome McGann wobec anglo-amerykańskiej tradycji edytorstwa naukowego

Cybulski, Łukasz

doi:0867-0633

Download

Title: Krytyka tekstu i teoria dzieła. Jerome McGann wobec anglo-amerykańskiej tradycji edytorstwa naukowego

References:

1. G. Taylor, What is an Author [not]?, „Critical Survey” 1995 no. 3, vol. 7, s. 241.
2. J. McGann, The monks and the giants. Textual and bibliographical studies and the interpretation of literary works, w: Textual criticism and literary interpretation, ed. J. McGann, University of Chicago Press, Chicago 1985 s. 199.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780198117506.003.0003
3. G.T. Tanselle, Textual criticism since Greg. A chronicle, 1950-2000, The Bibliographical Society of The University of Virginia, Charlottesville 2005, s. 51-52, 70, 72, 76 i passim.
http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/3732651
4. F. Bowers, Textual criticism, w: The aims and methods of scholarship in modern language and literatures, ed. J. Thorpe, Modern Language Association of America, New York 1963, s. 24.
http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/3721181
5. P. Shillingsburg, An inquiry into the social status of texts and modes of textual criticism, „Studies in Bibliography” 1989, vol. 42, s. 57-60.
6. D. Pizer, On the editing of modern american texts, „Bulletin of the New York Public Library” 1971, vol. 75.
7. D. Pizer, The editing of American literature, 1890-1930: essays and reviews, Scarecrow Press, Lanham 2012.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1353/san.2013.0005
8. Thorpe, Principles of textual criticism, Huntington Library, San Marino 1972.
9. P. Gaskell, A new introduction to bibliography, Oak Knoll Press, New York 1972.
10. R. Murray Davis, On editing modern texts: who should do what and to whom?, „Journal of Modern Literature” 1974 no. 4, vol. 3, s. 1012.
11. New approach to the critical constitution of literary texts, „Studies in Bibliography” 1975, vol. 28.
12. Hans Walter Gabler, Unsought encounters, w: Devils and angels. Textual editing and literary theory, ed. P. Cohen, Univeristy Press of Virginia, Charlottesville–Londyn 1991.
http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/2928128
13. Hans Walter Gabler, Textual criticism and theory in modern german editing, w: Contemporary German editorial theory, ed. H.W. Gabler, G. Bornstein, G.B. Pierce, Univeristy of Michigan Press, Ann Arbor 1995.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1515/arbi.1998.16.1.1
14. M. Peckham, Reflections on the foundations of modern textual editing, „Proof. The Yearbook of American Bibliographical and Textual Studies” 1971 no. 1.
15. P. Shillingsburg, Editorial problems are readers’ problems, „Browning Institute Studies” 1981, vol. 9.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s0092472500001206
16. H. Parker, The determinacy of the creative process and the „autority” of the autor’s textual decisions, „College Literature” 1983 no. 2, vol. 10.
17. H. Parker, Lost authority: non-sense, skewed meanings, and intentionless meanings, „Critical Inquiry” 1983 no. 4, vol. 9.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1086/448230
18. H. Parker, Flawed texts and verbal icons: literary authority in American fiction, Northwestern University Press, Evanston Illinois 1984, s. 17-51.
http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/2926496
19. D.C. Greetham, [Textual] criticism and deconstruction, „Studies in Bibliography” 1991, vol. 44, s. 3.
20. The division of the kingdoms. Shakespeare’s two versions of „King Lear”, ed. G. Taylor, M. Warren, Clarendon Press, New York 1986.
21. G. Taylor, In media res: from Jerome through Greg to Jerome (McGann), „Textual Cultures” 2009 no. 2, vol. 4, s. 89.
http://dx.doi.org/10.2979/tex.2009.4.2.88
22. P.W.K. Stone, The textual history of „King Lear”, Scolar Press, London 1980, s. 1, 158; S. Wells Introduction. The once and future „King Lear”, w: The division of the kingdoms. Shakespeare’s two versions of „King Lear”, ed. G. Taylor, M. Warren, Clarendon Press, New York 1986.
23. T. Clayton, „Is this the promis’d end?”: revision in the role of the King, w: The division…; R. McLeod Gon. No more, the text is foolish, w: The division of the kingdoms. Shakespeare’s two versions of „King Lear”, ed. G. Taylor, M. Warren, Clarendon Press, New York 1986.
24. D.C. Greetham, Textual forensics, „PMLA” 1996 no. 1, vol. 111.
http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/463132
25. G. Taylor Monopolies, show trials, disaster, and invasion: „King Lear” and censorship, w: The division of the kingdoms. Shakespeare’s two versions of „King Lear”, ed. G. Taylor, M. Warren, Clarendon Press, New York 1986.
26. D.C. Greetham, Textual forensics, „PMLA” 1996 no. 1, vol. 111.
27. M. Warren, The diminution of Kent, w: he division of the kingdoms. Shakespeare’s two versions of „King Lear”, ed. G. Taylor, M. Warren, Clarendon Press, New York 1986.
28. G. Egan, The struggle for Shakespeare’s tex Twentieth-century editorial theory and practice, Cambridge University Press, New York 2010, s. 181, 190 i n.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/0013838x.2013.779111
29. J. McGann, A critique of modern textual criticism, University Press of Virginia, Charlottesville 1992, s. 5.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1353/phl.1984.0003
30. G.T. Tanselle, Textual criticism…, s. 240, 248-249.
31. P. Cohen, Introduction, w: Devils and angels…, s. XIV.
32. W. Speed Hill, From „An Age of Editing” to a „Paradigm Shift”: an editorial retrospect, „Text” 2006, vol. 16, s. 37-39.
33. D.C. Greetham, Textual and literary theory: redrawing the matrix, „Studies in Bibliography” 1989, vol. 42, s. 7.
34. P. Shillingsburg, The autonomous author, the sociology of texts, and the polemics of textual criticism, w: Devils and angels…, s. 22.
35. J. McGann, Presidential address: hideous progeny, rough beasts: editing as theoretical pursuit, „Text” 1998, vol. 11, s. 4-5.
36. P. Davison, „Tex Transactions of the society for textual scholarship”. Vol. 1 (For 1981) by D.C. Greetham, W. Speed Hill, „The Review of English Studies. New Series” 1986 no. 148, vol. 37.
37. R. Wellek, A. Warren, Teoria literatury, przeł. J. Krycki, red. M. Żurowski, PWN, Warszawa 1976, s. 68.
38. J. McGann, The beauty of inflections. Literary investigations in historical method and theory, Clarendon Press, New York 1985, s. 6-7, 10, 17-18, 90-92, 111.
http://www.jstor.org/stable/2905410?origin=crossref&seq=1#page_scan_tab_contents
39. J. McGann, Social values and poetic acts. The historical judgment of literary work.
http://dx.doi.org/10.4159/harvard.9780674180772
40. P. Shillingsburg, Scholarly editing in the computer age. Theory and practice, University of Michigan Press, Ann Arbor 1996, s. 91.
http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/3190085
41. A.E. Housman, Selected prose, ed. J. Carter, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge 1961, s. 131.
42. K. Sutherland, Anglo-American editorial theory, w: The Cambridge companion to textual scholarship, ed. N. Fraisat, J. Flanders, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge 2013, s. 44, 50.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/cco9781139044073.003
43. J. McGann, The textual condition, w: tegoż The textual condition, Princeton University Press, Princeton 1991, s. 95.
44. „Ktoś, kto pisze, ma w sobie czytelnika, ale też krytyka i cały dziwny konglomerat różnych osób”, rozmowa Mileny Rachid Chehab z Adamem Zagajewskim I co z tego, że poeta się nie klika?, „Gazeta Wyborcza”, 20-12 lipca 2013 nr 168, s. 23.
45. P. Shillingsburg, „Ulysses” as a postmodern text: the Gabler edition, „Criticism” 1985 no. 3, vol. 27, s. 294-297.
46. J. McGann, The case of „The Ambassadors” and the textual condition, w: Palimpsest. Editorial theory in the humanities, ed. G Bornstein, R.G. Williams, University of Michigan Press, Ann Arbor 1993, s. 162.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1086/pbsa.88.4.24304753
47. K. Sutherland, Anglo-American editorial theory, s. 53-54.
48. G.T. Tanselle, Textual criticism and deconstruction, „Studies in Bibliography” 1990, vol. 43, s. 29.
49. G.T. Tanselle, Editing without a copy-text, „Studies in Bibliography” 1994, vol. 47, s. 22.
50. D. Phepls, Where’s the book? The text in the development of literary sociology, „Text” 1996, vol. 9.
51. J. McGann, Correspondence, 20 December 1989, w: D.C. Greetham [Textual] criticism…, s. 9.
52. G. Bornstein, What is the text of a poem by Yeats?, w: Palimpsest…, s. 169-171.
53. W.W. Greg, Bibliography – an apologia, „The Library” 1932 no. 13, s. 114, 121-122, 124.
54. D.F. McKenzie, Bibliography and the sociology of texts, British Library, Cambridge 1999.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/cbo9780511483226
55. J. McGann, From text to work: digital tools and the emergence of the social text, „Text” 2006, vol. 16, s. 50.
http://dx.doi.org/10.7202/013153ar
56. J. McGann, Theory of texts, „London Review of Books” 1988 no. 4, vol. 10.
57. T.H. Howard Hill, The dangers of editing, or, the death of the editor, „Ecdotica” 2009, vol. 6, s. 286- -289, 295-296.
58. J. McGaan, The rationale of hyper text, „Text” 1996, vol. 9.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780198236634.003.0002
59. J. McGaan, Radiant textuality, „Victorian Studies” 1996 no. 3, vol. 39.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-1-137-10738-1
60. J. McGaan, The rationale of hyper text, „Text” 1996, vol. 9; tenże Radiant textuality, „Victorian Studies” 1996 no. 3, vol. 39;.
61. J. McGaan, The Gutenberg variations, „Text” 2002, vol. 14.
62. J. McGaan, Marking texts of many dimensions, w: A companion to digital humanities, ed. S. Schreibman, R. Siemens, J. Unswotrh, Blackwell Publishers, Oxford 2004.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/9780470999875.ch16
63. P. Shillingsburg, Text’s matter, concept and action, „Studies in Bibliography” 1991, vol. 44.
64. P. Cohen, D.H. Jackson, Notes on emerging paradigms in editorial theory, w: Devils and angels…, s. 104-112.
65. B.T. Bennet, Feminism and editing Mary Wollstonecraft Shelley: the editor and?/ or? the text, w: Palimpsest…, s. 67-68, 81-92.
66. N. Fugmann, Contemporary editorial theory and the transvaluation of postmodern critique, „Text” 1997, vol. 10.
67. H.W. Gabler, Textual studies and criticism, „The Library Chronicle of the University of Texas at Austin” 1990 no. 1-2, vol. 20, s. 151, 153, 161, 163-165.
68. P. Eggert, Textual product or textual process: procedures and assumptions of critical editing, w: Devils and angels…, s. 58, 62-63, 66-67.
69. J. McLaverty, Issues of identity and utterance: an intentionalist response to „Textual Instability”, w: Devils and angels…, s. 144, 147.
70. R.G. Williams, I shall be spoken: textual boundaries, authors, and intent, w: Palimpses .., s. 61-62.
71. P. Shillingsburg, Resisting texts. Authority and submission in constructions of meaning, University of Michigan Press, Ann Arbor 1997, s. 18.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1086/pbsa.93.2.24304104
72. T.H. Howard Hill The dangers of editing, or, the death of the editor.
73. S. Mailloux, The rhetorical politics of editing: a response to Eggert, Greetham, and Cohen and Jackson, w: Devils and angels…, s. 131.