The information provided also compels the average writer toward the necessary elements of the writing process through various methods of grammar, punctuation, and style implications. Though they are presented completely different, some of the basic style suggestions found in Strunk and White are somewhat similar to those in Williams. Both books propose that good writing style must consist of: clarity, precision, length, revision, cohesion, and reader sensitivity_all with the application of basic writing rules and guidelines. Although each book can be very helpful to the average writer, the intense amount of instruction may, at first, seem overwhelming. I must honestly admit that Williams was not the easiest style guide to read.
The depth of the poem, in both its poetry and narration, is incredible, and in the original Old English the integration and weaving of meaning throughout the text is virtually unparalleled. Though Beowulf is an obvious masterpiece of English literature, its true importance in history is often understated and misrepresented. This is because the Old English that the poem is written in is very difficult and different from what most readers consider English, or even “old English”. The antiquity of the text limits the poem’s greatness and true understanding to a very small group of scholars, “armed” with their word-hoards and knowledge of Old English; the rest of the “unready” literary world sees a diluted representation through translation. Over time there have been large numbers of translations of Beowulf, in various forms, that have provided the greater literary world with a common perception of the text.
Tradition and Innovation in Chaucer. London: Macmillan, 1982. Chaucer, Geoffrey. The Canterbury Tales. In the Riverside Chaucer.
Boston: Houghton Mifflin Company,1987. 3-328 Secondary Taavitsainen, Irma. "Personality and styles of Affect in the Canterbury Tales" Chaucer in Perspective. Ed. Geoffrey Lester.Midsomer North, Bath: Sheffield Academic Press Ltd. 1999.
While on these trips, Chaucer discovered the works... ... middle of paper ... ...an see, when reading a work such as The Canterbury Tales, there are many advantages and disadvantages to the work being in both middle and modern English. Before reading such a work, one must realize his or her own purpose for reading the work and then decide on which version to read. It is the opinion of many that it is beneficial to read both versions in order to educate one self about both languages as well as to experience the evolution of the English language. The English language has changed greatly over the many centuries since the time this work was written. However, this work helps create a bridge between the languages of the middle and modern English worlds.
While these two stories show great similarities, they also contain many differences. Because they are derived from the same original work, The Canterbury Tales by Geoffrey Chaucer, they are greatly deviated in their structure, vocabulary, and story line. Version I, the text from the textbook that was translated by Nevill Coghill was more indicative of Old England based on the old and sophisticated language used and the verse of the text. Version II, the adaptation be another author into a narrative was an easier read and used lower-level vocabulary and although it attempted to use an old style form of writing, it did not seem likely to a reader that the narrative was close to the original.
The Canterbury Tales, - Biblical Allusions in The Shipman’s Tale There is no doubting Chaucer’s mastery at paroemia; that his adaptations of his many and varied sources transcended their roots is attested by the fact that, unlike many of his contemporaries or authorities, his works have not “passen as dooth a shadwe upon the wal”. Yet while his skill as a medieval author is undisputed, the extent of his subtlety is not always fully appreciated. In The Canterbury Tales, for instance, while some tales were rapid in drawing academic interest and scholarly interpretations, others were quickly dismissed as ribald tales, as simple fabliaux hardly worthy of more than a cursory examination. The Shipman’s Tale was one of these. That “[It] may be Chaucer’s earliest fabliau” and “relatively simple in design and execution” seemed, for a period of time, to be the general consensus on this piece; the primary concern of scholars was in unearthing its sources (which proved to be uncharacteristically problematic), not in analysing its structural complexities or for insights into medieval society and life.
It is tedious for authors to make their translation literal to the original epic, while simultaneously making it understandable, modern, and readable. Many have tried to accomplish this, but personally I find that Seamus Heaney’s translation of the epic accomplishes these goals notably well, keeping the plotlines intact while putting a vastly interesting twist on the aged epic. Heaney’s use of colorful vocabulary creates and understandable and modern translation while still preserving the texts key values and lessons, far preceding many other translations. Translations of the epic Beowulf vary in a plethora of different ways. Most authors will over-glorify the poem to the point where it becomes unrealistic and sprawling.
Poetry conveys a lot of meanings in a few words. The poetic sentence is concise and has a strong imagery and emotions. Poetry is a condense language that each word has a proper meaning as well as the meaning in relation to the other words of the text. In the case of Shakespearean poems, the literature or poetry teachers have to choose between several schools of thought because what the poet wishes to say and the way that it is expressed is different. Therefore, the readers first have to understand the form to understand the meaning.