Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-p9bg8 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-22T14:08:27.942Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Textual Forensics

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  23 October 2020

D. C. Greetham
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Because textual scholarship, having no definable Fach, or subject matter, is an exemplary postmodernist antidiscipline, it can serve as a site for testing the epistemological assumptions and protocols of the current debate over the status of evidence and the nature of proof. Since text is “authority” and “original” and yet also “network” and “tissue” and since forensics encompasses both hard physical “facts” and the rhetorical formulation that gives such data interpretive meaning, a textual forensics will codify and test the interaction of the phenomenological world and the hermeneutic analysis of its evidence. With procedural and conceptual links both to scientific empiricism and to rhetorical strategies for persuasion, textual scholarship becomes a vehicle for anatomizing the postmodernist breakdown of the master narratives, including that of evidence and proof.

Type
Research Article
Information
PMLA , Volume 111 , Issue 1: Special Topic The Status of Evidence , January 1996 , pp. 32 - 51
Copyright
Copyright © Modern Language Association of America, 1996

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Works Cited

Barthes, Roland “From Work to Text.” Image, Music, Text. Trans. Heath, Stephen. New York: Hill, 1977. 155–15.Google Scholar
Berger, Thomas L “The New Historicism and the Editing of English Renaissance Texts.” New Ways of Looking at Old Texts: Papers of the Renaissance English Text Society, 1985-1991. Ed. Hill, W. Speed. Binghamton: Medieval and Renaissance Texts and Studies / Renaissance English Text Soc., 1993. 195–19.Google Scholar
Bidwell, John “The Study of Paper as Evidence, Artefact, and Commodity.” Davison, Book 69–82.Google Scholar
Bowers, Fredson “Bibliographical Evidence from the Printer's Measure.” Studies in Bibliography 2 (1949-50): 153–15.Google Scholar
Bowers, Fredson “Greg's ‘Rationale of Copy-Text’ Revisited.” Studies in Bibliography 31 (1978): 90–161.Google Scholar
Bowers, Fredson “Notes on Theory and Practice in Editing Texts.” Davison, Book 244–24.Google Scholar
Bowers, Fredson “Running-Title Evidence for Determining Half-Sheet Imposition.” Studies in Bibliography 1 (1948-49): 199–202.Google Scholar
Bowers, Fredson “Some Principles for Scholarly Editions of Nineteenth-Century American Authors.” Studies in Bibliography 17 (1964): 223–22.Google Scholar
Bowers, Fredson “Unfinished Business.” Text 4 (1988): 1–12.Google Scholar
Boydston, Jo Ann “The Collected Works of John Dewey and the CEAA/CSE: A Case History.” Papers of the Bibliographical Society of America 85 (1991): 119–11.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Boydston, Jo Ann, ed The Early Works, 1882-1898. By John Dewey. 5 vols. Carbondale: Southern Illinois UP; London: Feffer, 1969-72.Google Scholar
Boydston, Jo Ann “In Praise of Apparatus.” Text 5 (1991): 1–14.Google Scholar
Boydston, Jo Ann. The Later Works, 1925-1953. By John Dewey. 17 vols. Carbondale: Southern Illinois UP, 1981-90.Google Scholar
Boydston, Jo Ann. The Middle Works, 1899-1924. By John Dewey. 15 vols. Carbondale: Southern Illinois UP; London: Feffer, 1976–80 (vols. 1-10); Carbondale: Southern Illinois UP, 1982-83 (vols. 11-15).Google Scholar
Braunmuller, A. R “Work, Document, and Miscellany: A Response to Professors de Grazia and Marotti.” New Ways of Looking at Old Texts: Papers of the Renaissance English Text Society, 1985-1991. Ed. Hill, W. Speed. Binghamton: Medieval and Renaissance Texts and Studies / Renaissance English Text Soc., 1993. 223–22.Google Scholar
Brewer, Charlotte “Authorial vs. Scribal Writing in Piers Plowman.” Medieval Literature: Texts and Interpretation. Ed. Machan, Tim William. Binghamton: Medieval and Renaissance Texts and Studies, 1991. 59–89.Google Scholar
Browne, Malcolm “Two Groups of Physicists Produce Matter That Einstein Postulated.” New York Times 14 July 1995: A1+.Google Scholar
Bruccoli, Matthew J., ed The Great Gatsby. By F. Scott Fitzgerald. Cambridge: Cambridge UP, 1991. The Cambridge Edition of the Works of F. Scott Fitzgerald. Ed. Bruccoli and James L. W. West III. 1991-.Google Scholar
Carter, Harry, and Davis, Herbert, eds Mechanick Exercises on the Whole Art of Printing (1683-4). By Joseph Moxon. 2nd ed. Oxford: Oxford UP, 1962.Google Scholar
Carter, John, and Pollard, Graham. An Enquiry into the Nature of Certain Nineteenth-Century Pamphlets. London: Constable, 1934. Ed. Nicholas Barker and John Collins. 2nd ed. London: Scolar, 1983.Google Scholar
Chandler, James K., Davidson, Arnold I., and Harootunian, Harry D., eds Questions of Evidence. Chicago: U of Chicago P, 1993.Google Scholar
Christianson, C. Paul “Evidence for the Study of London's Late Medieval Manuscript Book Trade.” Book Production and Publishing in Britain, 1375-1475. Ed. Griffiths, Jeremy and Pearsall, Derek. Cambridge: Cambridge UP, 1989. 87–108.Google Scholar
Committee on Scholarly Editions. Guidelines for Scholarly Editions. New York: MLA, 1992.Google Scholar
Davison, Peter, ed The Book Encompassed: Studies in Twentieth-Century Bibliography. Cambridge: Cambridge UP, 1992.Google Scholar
Davison, Peter “The Selection and Presentation of Bibliographical Evidence.” Analytical and Enumerative Bibliography 1 (1977): 101–10.Google Scholar
Donaldson, E. Talbot “The Psychology of Editors of Medieval Texts.” Speaking of Chaucer. London: Athlone; New York: Norton, 1970. 102–10.Google Scholar
Duggan, Hoyt N “The Electronic Piers Plowman B: A New Diplomatic-Critical Edition.” Æstel 1 (1993): 55–75.Google Scholar
Erdman, David V “The Signature of Style.” Erdman and Fogel 45–68.Google Scholar
Erdman, David V., and Fogel, Ephim G., eds Evidence for Authorship: Essays on Problems of Attribution. Ithaca: Cornell UP, 1966.Google Scholar
Ferguson, Alfred R., et al., eds The Collected Works of Ralph Waldo Emerson. Cambridge: Belknap-Harvard UP, 1971- .Google Scholar
Finneran, Richard J., et al., eds The Cornell Yeats. Ithaca: Cornell UP, 1982- .Google Scholar
Foucault, Michel “What Is an Author?” The Foucault Reader. Ed. Rabinow, Paul. New York: Pantheon, 1984. 101–10.Google Scholar
Fowler, David C “A New Edition of the B Text of Piers Plowman.” Yearbook of English Studies 7 (1977): 23–42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gabler, Hans Walter, ed Ulysses: A Critical and Synoptic Edition. By James Joyce. New York: Garland, 1984.Google Scholar
Gaskell, Philip. New Introduction to Bibliography. 1972. Oxford: Oxford UP, 1985.Google Scholar
Ginzburg, Carlo. Clues, Myths, and the Historical Method. Trans. Tedeschi, John and Tedeschi, Anne C. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins UP, 1986.Google Scholar
Gracia, Jorge J. E. The Metaphysics of Texts: Ontological Status, Identity, Author, and Audience. Albany: State U of New York P, forthcoming.Google Scholar
Gracia, Jorge J. E. A Theory of Textuality. Albany: State U of New York P, 1995.Google Scholar
Grafton, Anthony. Forgers and Critics: Creativity and Duplicity in Western Scholarship. Princeton: Princeton UP, 1990.Google Scholar
Greenberg, Clement “Modern and Postmodern.” Arts Magazine 54 (1980): 64–66.Google Scholar
Greenberg, Clement. The Notion of the “Post-modern.” Sydney: Bloxham, 1980.Google Scholar
Greetham, D. C “Editorial and Critical Theory: From Modernism to Post-modernism.” Palimpsest: Editorial Theory in the Humanities. Ed. Bornstein, George and Williams, Ralph. Ann Arbor: U of Michigan P, 1993. 1–28.Google Scholar
Greetham, D. C “The Manifestation and Accommodation of Theory in Textual Editing.” Devils and Angels: Textual Editing and Literary Theory. Ed. Cohen, Philip. Charlottesville: UP of Virginia, 1991. 78–102.Google Scholar
Greetham, D. C “The Place of Fredson Bowers in Mediaeval Editing.” Papers of the Bibliographical Society of America 82 (1988): 53–69.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Greetham, D. C Rev. of The Book Encompassed: Studies in Twentieth-Century Bibliography, ed. Peter Davison. Analytical and Enumerative Bibliography ns 7 (1993): 216–21.Google Scholar
Greetham, D. C, ed Scholarly Editing: A Guide to Research. New York: MLA, 1995.Google Scholar
Greetham, D. C “Slips and Errors in Textual Criticism.” Greetham, Textual Transgressions.Google Scholar
Greetham, D. C “Textual Imperialism and Post-colonial Bibliography.” Greetham, Textual Transgressions.Google Scholar
Greetham, D. C. Textual Transgressions: Essays toward the Construction of a Biobibliography. New York: Garland, 1995.Google Scholar
Greetham, D. C. Theories of the Text. Oxford: Clarendon, 1996.Google Scholar
Greg, W. W. Bibliography of the English Printed Drama to the Restoration. London: Bibliographical Soc., 1939-59.Google Scholar
Greg, W. W “The Rationale of Copy-Text.” Studies in Bibliography 3 (1950-51): 19–36.Google Scholar
Harris, Kate “Patrons, Buyers and Owners: The Evidence for Ownership, and the Role of Book Owners in Book Production and the Book Trade.” Book Production and Publishing in Britain, 1375-1475. Ed. Griffiths, Jeremy and Pearsall, Derek. Cambridge: Cambridge UP, 1989. 163–200.Google Scholar
Hayford, Harrison, Parker, Hershel, and Tanselle, G. Thomas, eds Typee: A Peep at Polynesian Life. By Herman Melville. Evanston: Northwestern UP; Chicago: Newberry Lib., 1968.Google Scholar
Hill, W. Speed “The Calculus of Error; or, Confessions of a General Editor.” Modern Philology 75 (1978): 247–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hinman, Charlton, ed The Norton Facsimile: The Shakespeare First Folio. New York: Norton, 1968.Google Scholar
Holderness, Graham, and Loughrey, Bryan, eds The Tragicall Historie of Hamlet Prince of Denmark. By William Shakespeare. Hemel Hempstead: Harvester Wheatsheaf, 1993.Google Scholar
Housman, A. E. Selected Prose. Ed. Carter, John. Cambridge: Cambridge UP, 1961.Google Scholar
Jameson, Fredric. Postmodernism; or, The Cultural Logic of Late Capitalism. Durham: Duke UP, 1991.Google Scholar
Joyce, James. Portrait of the Artist as a Young Man. New York: Viking, 1964.Google Scholar
Kane, George, and Donaldson, E. Talbot, eds Piers Plowman: The B Version. London: Athlone, 1975.Google Scholar
Knowles, Richard “Variorum Commentary.” Text 6 (1993): 35–47.Google Scholar
Kristeller, Paul Oskar “Textual Scholarship and General Theories of History and Literature.” Text 3 (1987): 1–9.Google Scholar
McGann, Jerome J “The Case of The Ambassadors and the Textual Condition.” Palimpsest: Editorial Theory in the Humanities. Ed. Bornstein, George and Williams, Ralph. Ann Arbor: U of Michigan P, 1993. 151–15.Google Scholar
McGann, Jerome J. A Critique of Modern Textual Criticism. Chicago: U of Chicago P, 1983. Charlottesville: UP of Virginia, 1992.Google Scholar
McGann, Jerome J “Literature, Meaning, and the Discontinuity of Fact.” Modern Language Quarterly 54 (1993): 165–16.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McGann, Jerome J “Revision, Rewriting, Rereading; or, ‘An Error [Not] in The Ambassadors.‘” American Literature 64 (1992): 95–110.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McKenzie, D. F “The History of the Book.” Davison, Book 290–301.Google Scholar
McKenzie, D. F “Printers of the Mind: Some Notes on Bibliographical Theories and Printing-House Practices.” Studies in Bibliography 22 (1969): 1–75.Google Scholar
McLaverty, James “The Concept of Authorial Intention in Textual Criticism.” Library 6th ser. 6 (1984): 121–12.Google Scholar
McLaverty, James “Issues of Identity and Utterance: An Intentionalist Response to ‘Textual Instability.‘” Devils and Angels: Textual Editing and Literary Theory. Ed. Cohen, Philip. Charlottesville: UP of Virginia, 1991. 134–13.Google Scholar
McLeod, Randall “From ‘Tranceformations in the Text of Orlando Furioso.‘” New Directions in Textual Studies. Ed. Oliphant, Dave and Bradford, Robin. Austin: U of Texas P; Harry Ransom Humanities Research Center, 1990. 61–85.Google Scholar
McLeod, Randall “Information on Information.” Text 5 (1991): 241–24., [81-82], 277–81.Google Scholar
The Oxford English Dictionary. 2nd ed. 1989.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Parrish, Stephen, gen. ed The Cornell Wordsworth. Ithaca: Cornell UP, 1975- .Google Scholar
Patterson, Lee “The Logic of Textual Criticism and the Way of Genius: The Kane-Donaldson Piers Plowman in Historical Perspective.” Textual Criticism and Literary Interpretation. Ed. McGann, Jerome J. Chicago: U of Chicago P, 1985. 55–91.Google Scholar
Pearsall, Derek, and Cooper, R. A. “The Gawain Poems: A Statistical Approach to the Question of Common Authorship.” Review of English Studies ns 39 (1988): 365–36.Google Scholar
Piers Plowman Archive. Ed. Duggan, Hoyt N. et al Ann Arbor: U of Michigan P, 1995.Google Scholar
Pizer, Donald “On the Editing of Modern American Texts.” Bulletin of the New York Public Library 75 (1971): 147–14.Google Scholar
Pizer, Donald “Self-Censorship and Textual Editing.” Textual Criticism and Literary Interpretation. Ed. McGann, Jerome J. Chicago: U of Chicago P, 1985. 144–14.Google Scholar
The Random House Dictionary of the English Language. 2nd ed. 1987.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Scholes, Robert “Canonicity and Textuality.” Introduction to Scholarship in Modern Languages and Literatures. Ed. Gibaldi, Joseph. 2nd ed. New York: MLA, 1992. 138–13.Google Scholar
Schwab, Richard N., et al “Cyclotron Analysis of the Ink in the Forty-Two Line Bible.” Papers of the Bibliographical Society of America 77 (1983): 285–315.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schwab, Richard N. “Ink Patterns in the Gutenberg New Testament: The Proton Milliprobe Analysis of the Lilly Library Copy.” Papers of the Bibliographical Society of America 80 (1986): 305–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schwab, Richard N. “The Proton Milliprobe Ink Analysis of the Harvard B42, Volume II.” Papers of the Bibliographical Society of America 81 (1987): 403–40.Google Scholar
Shaw, David “La Bibliologie in France.” Davison, Book 206–20.Google Scholar
Shaw, David “A Sampling Theory for Bibliographical Research.” Library 5th ser. 27 (1972): 310–31.Google Scholar
Sherbo, Arthur “The Uses and Abuses of Internal Evidence.” Erdman and Fogel 6–24.Google Scholar
Sprinchorn, Evert “Shakespeare's Bad Quarto.” Times Literary Supplement 21 Jan. 1994: 15.Google Scholar
Stevenson, Allan “Paper as Bibliographical Evidence.” Library 5th ser. 17 (1962): 285–315.Google Scholar
Tanselle, G. Thomas “Bibliography and Science.” Studies in Bibliography 27 (1974): 55–89.Google Scholar
Tanselle, G. Thomas “Classical, Biblical, and Medieval Textual Criticism and Modern Editing.” Studies in Bibliography 36 (1983): 21–68.Google Scholar
Tanselle, G. Thomas “The Editorial Problem of Final Authorial Intention.” Studies in Bibliography 29 (1976): 167–211.Google Scholar
Tanselle, G. Thomas “External Fact as an Editorial Problem.” Studies in Bibliography 32 (1979): 1–47.Google Scholar
Tanselle, G. Thomas. The History of Books as a Field of Study. Chapel Hill: Hanes Foundation; U of North Carolina, 1981.Google Scholar
Tanselle, G. Thomas. A Rationale of Textual Criticism. Philadelphia: U of Pennsylvania P, 1989.Google Scholar
Tanselle, G. Thomas “Texts of Documents and Texts of Works.” Textual Criticism and Scholarly Editing. Charlottesville: UP of Virginia, 1990. 3–23.Google Scholar
Tanselle, G. Thomas “The Use of Type Damage as Evidence in Bibliographical Description.” Library 5th ser. 23 (1968): 328–32.Google Scholar
Tarrant, R. J “Classical Latin Literature.” Greetham, Scholarly Editing 95–148.Google Scholar
Taylor, Gary “Revising Shakespeare.” Text 3 (1987): 285–304.Google Scholar
Thorpe, James. Principles of Textual Criticism. San Marino: Huntington Lib., 1972.Google Scholar
Timpanaro, Sebastiano. The Freudian Slip: Psychoanalysis and Textual Criticism. Trans. Soper, Kate. London: Verso, 1976.Google Scholar
Turner, Robert K. Jr “Reappearing Types as Bibliographical Evidence.” Studies in Bibliography 19 (1966): 198–209.Google Scholar
Urkowitz, Steven “‘Well Said, Old Mole’: Burying Three Hamlets in Modern Editions.” Shakespeare Study Today. Ed. Ziegler, Georgiana. New York: AMS, 1986. 37–70.Google Scholar
Valdés, Mario. World-Making: The Literary Truth-Claim and the Interpretation of Texts. Toronto: U of Toronto P, 1992.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Van Doren, Charles. A History of Knowledge. New York: Birch Lane, 1991.Google Scholar
Vickers, Brian “Hamlet by Dogberry: A Perverse Reading of the Bad Quarto.” Times Literary Supplement 24 Dec. 1993: 5–6.Google Scholar
Vinaver, Eugène “Principles of Textual Emendation.” Studies in French Language and Medieval Literature Presented to Professor M. K. Pope. Manchester: U of Manchester P, 1930. 351–35.Google Scholar
Weiss, Adrian “Reproductions of Early Dramatic Texts as a Source of Bibliographical Evidence.” Text 4 (1988): 237–23.Google Scholar
Wellek, René, and Ribeiro, Alvaro, eds Evidence in Literary Scholarship: Essays in Memory of James Marshall Osborn. Oxford: Clarendon, 1979.Google Scholar
Worthen, John “Checking for Fact-Checkers.” Times Literary Supplement 7 Jan. 1994: 11–12.Google Scholar
Yamashita, Hiroshi “Fredson Bowers and the Editing of Modern Japanese Literature.” Text 8 (1995): forthcoming.Google Scholar