Talk:New Philology (Latin America)
 | This article is rated Stub-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||
Other uses of the term "New Philology"?[edit]
After reading the article, I'm a bit confused. Specialising in medieval culture, I have heard of the term "New Philology" meaning a re-visiting of the historical sources. In earlier days, scholars were interested in reconstructing the authors version of a text/a composition, and often discarded later copies that were obviously too far removed from the "original" version. Later, following the ideas of a "New Philology", scholars were interested in those previously discarded manuscripts, and the insights they could gain from them concerning the people who copied and used them. I hope I'm not mistaken in this, but I would be glad if someone told me if this broader application of the term is legitimate.--134.76.2.19 (talk) 16:14, 21 July 2009 (UTC)
- I wrote the article and this is the only meaning of the term I know of. But that doesn't mean that it is the only one since I am for example not well read in medieval philology. If you can find sources about the new philology in medieval studies it would be great to add it it seems that the outlook of medieval new philology and latin american philology is pretty much the same - namely to use textual analysis to extract historical information of largely sociocultural nature from otherwise neglected sources.·Maunus·ƛ· 17:17, 21 July 2009 (UTC)
There's a good start-out description at http://www.staff.hum.ku.dk/mjd/words.html on medievalism and New Philoogy, and quite a long bibliography. The absolute start point is the issues of _Speculum_ mentioned at that website...Condesa Traidora (talk) 09:31, 14 July 2010 (UTC)
- It is used also in the study of non-colonial literature (I know it from Medieval literature) -- I think the article is a great discussion of its usage in colonial literature, so I'll try to expand its scope without losing the great base that Maunus has built on. -- Michael Scott Cuthbert (talk) 01:45, 25 June 2012 (UTC)
- Yes, its true that there is also a school of medieval studies that goes by "New Philology" I don't think they're related though. Please do expand to also include the medieval variety of NP.·ʍaunus·snunɐw· 01:54, 25 June 2012 (UTC)
- I'm reading a long dissertation on New Philology right now (which is what brought me here), so hopefully I'll know in a few days whether the two fields have a common origin or if we should say "is a term for several unrelated...". In both cases though it seems to be an argument for the use of careful studies of physical texts and their makeup as a part of cultural studies. -- Michael Scott Cuthbert (talk) 17:55, 25 June 2012 (UTC)
- Nearly eleven years later, I have been WP:BOLD and created two separate articles, New Philology (Latin America) and New Philology (medieval studies). Alarichall (talk) 18:35, 15 April 2023 (UTC)
- I'm reading a long dissertation on New Philology right now (which is what brought me here), so hopefully I'll know in a few days whether the two fields have a common origin or if we should say "is a term for several unrelated...". In both cases though it seems to be an argument for the use of careful studies of physical texts and their makeup as a part of cultural studies. -- Michael Scott Cuthbert (talk) 17:55, 25 June 2012 (UTC)
- Yes, its true that there is also a school of medieval studies that goes by "New Philology" I don't think they're related though. Please do expand to also include the medieval variety of NP.·ʍaunus·snunɐw· 01:54, 25 June 2012 (UTC)
- It is used also in the study of non-colonial literature (I know it from Medieval literature) -- I think the article is a great discussion of its usage in colonial literature, so I'll try to expand its scope without losing the great base that Maunus has built on. -- Michael Scott Cuthbert (talk) 01:45, 25 June 2012 (UTC)
External links modified (February 2018)[edit]
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on New Philology. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
- Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100622041658/http://www.history.ucsb.edu/cline/testaments_of_culhuacan.pdf to http://www.history.ucsb.edu/cline/testaments_of_culhuacan.pdf
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).
- If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
- If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 07:26, 17 February 2018 (UTC)