|WikiProject Biography||(Rated B-class)|
I propose the removal of the paragraph about "Digital Propp". This is not a serious resource (the project's approach to Propp indicates the authors either have not understood his theory or have not taken it seriously), and certainly doesn't deserve a mention in the article about Propp. --Tail 15:15, 2 May 2006 (UTC)
I have a minor but important observation to this article: Propp is presented at the begining as an structuralist. But at the end of the article, in the critique, Levy Strauss approach is mentioned as better than the formalist approach of Propp. Should Propp be introduced as a formalist? I would say so. I do not want to touch the article myself. alveolar 16:05, 4 March 2007 (UTC)alveolar
- i agreee totally with alveolar. Propp definitely was no structuralist. maybe his findings led the way to struturalism, but in the better case he would be at least a structuralist avant la lettre, that is, before the term was created, what happened only with the Strauss generation, i guess.
- --Hgfernan 22:12, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
Literature in German
There's a link called Assessment of Propp, but it is in German. This shouldn't be available on the english wikipedia site.
- I find this comment rather extraordinary. Why should literature in languages other than English not be available on the English Wikipedia? Wouldn't they be just as useful as English articles to those of us who are able to read more than one language? Every serious scholar is able to read English, French, and German, and most of my friends and colleagues also read languages such as Italian, Spanish, Portuguese, Dutch, Polish, Norwegian, and Russian, as well, of course, as Latin and Greek and in some cases Hebrew and Syriac. We are not all as stupid as the person who made that comment.--Oxonian2006 (talk) 10:29, 11 November 2009 (UTC)
Literature by Dr Jerry Everard
I have including the proper link for my summary of Vladimir Propp's 31 narrative units - the previous link went to a page entirely ripped from my site without permission. The original document, written in 1995 may be found <a href="http://www.lostbiro.com/Theorists/propp.html">here</a> I don't have a problem with the substantial reproduction of those words as they appear on the main Propp entry. The footnotes provide correct references to the elements of Propp's 'Morphology'.
I'm no expert, but I don't think the link to Donor should link to Fairy Godmother. Within Fairy Godmother there is a link to Donor so it's not a huge deal. Just my two cents, but I don't want to change without consensus.
A portion of the first paragraph (see below) needs to be rewritten as it is copied wholesale from the Introduction. In addition, the section references material that is not cited on the Wikipedia page.
First of all, there seem to be at least two distinct types of structural analysis in folklore. One is the type of which Propp's Morphology is the exemplar par excellence. In this type, the structure or formal organization of a folkloristic text is described following the chronological order of the linear sequence of elements in the text as reported from an informant. Thus if a tale consists of elements A to Z, the structure of the tale is delineated in terms of this same sequence. Following Lévi-Strauss (1964: 312), this linear sequential structural analysis we might term "syntagmatic" structural analysis, borrowing from the notion of syntax in the study of language (cf. Greimas 1966a:404). The other type of structural analysis in folklore seeks to describe the pattern (usually based upon an a priori binary principle of opposition) which allegedly underlies the folkloristic text. This pattern is not the same as the sequential structure at all. Rather the elements are taken out of the "given" order and are regrouped in one or more analytic schemas. Patterns or organization in this second type of structural analysis might be termed "paradigmatic" (cf. Sebag 1963:75), borrowing from the notion of paradigms in the study of language.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 220.127.116.11 (talk) 01:26, 27 January 2013 (UTC)
Large sections of the opening paragraph in the "Narrative Structures" section are taken word-for-word from the third paragraph of the introduction of the second edition of Propp's study. Here's a link to the source: http://homes.di.unimi.it/~alberti/Mm10/doc/propp.pdf