Publication: Sentencias y refranes en la hipotética Celestina primitiva
Authors
Bernaldo de Quirós Mateo, José Antonio
item.page.secondaryauthor
item.page.director
Publisher
Murcia: Universidad de Murcia, Editum
publication.page.editor
publication.page.department
DOI
item.page.type
info:eu-repo/semantics/article
Description
Abstract
Se parte de la hipótesis de que el “primer autor” de La Celestina no
escribió tan solo el primer acto, como se suele admitir, sino que escribió los
actos I a XIV, excluyendo las presuntas interpolaciones de Rojas, que son
generalmente sentencias traducidas del latín (de Aristóteles, Petrarca y
Séneca). Se argumenta que no es una objeción contra esta hipótesis el
hecho de que los paratextos de La Celestina afirmen que en la obra del
“primer autor” había abundantes sentencias, ya que, tras eliminar las
citadas interpolaciones, el número de sentencias restante es aún muy
elevado. Además, se puede constatar que hay claras diferencias entre las
sentencias del antiguo autor y las traducidas del latín, no solo en sus
fuentes, sino también en la manera de utilizarlas, lo que constituye un
argumento más para considerar que las traducciones fueron interpoladas
por Rojas dentro del texto primitivo.
It starts from the assumption that the "first author" of Celestina wrote not only the first act, as it is usually accepted, but acts I to XIV, excluding Rojas alleged interpolations, which are generally proverbs translated from Latin (Aristotle, Petrarch and Seneca). It is argued that it is not an objection to this hypotheses the fact that the paratexts of La Celestina assert the work of the “first author” had abundant proverbs, since, after eliminating the aforementioned interpolations, the number of remaining proverbs is still very elevated. Also, it is possible to state that there are clear differences between the first author’s proverbs and the proverbs translated from Latin, not only in their sources, but also in how they are used, which is another argument to consider that the translations were interpolated by Rojas within the original text.
It starts from the assumption that the "first author" of Celestina wrote not only the first act, as it is usually accepted, but acts I to XIV, excluding Rojas alleged interpolations, which are generally proverbs translated from Latin (Aristotle, Petrarch and Seneca). It is argued that it is not an objection to this hypotheses the fact that the paratexts of La Celestina assert the work of the “first author” had abundant proverbs, since, after eliminating the aforementioned interpolations, the number of remaining proverbs is still very elevated. Also, it is possible to state that there are clear differences between the first author’s proverbs and the proverbs translated from Latin, not only in their sources, but also in how they are used, which is another argument to consider that the translations were interpolated by Rojas within the original text.
publication.page.subject
Citation
item.page.embargo
Collections
Ir a Estadísticas
Sin licencia Creative Commons.