A simple basic axiomatic theory of syntax is developed. It allows us to prove Gödel’s celebrated diagonal lemma in a simple and straightforward way.

A more expressive axiomatic theory of syntax is presented. It is shown that this theory generalises the theory of chapter 5 and allows the derivation of many natural properties of syntax.

This chapter defines ‘criticism’, adapting John Dryden and Samuel Johnson, as a judicative, explicative, and appreciative encounter with literature. And in doing so, it sorts the seventeenth- and eighteenth-century ‘essay’ into three rough groupings: (1) digressive essays in the manner of Montaigne; (2) treatise essays like Dryden’s Of Dramatick Poesie; and (3) periodical essays like The Tatler and The Spectator. Following a thread of allusions to Cato the Younger through the works of Montaigne, Addison, Pope, and Elizabeth Montagu, I show how an important feature of modern close reading, the grammatically integrated quotation, grows out of the eighteenth-century critical essay.

Oxford classicist, lover of Renaissance art, Pater might seem to belong in a different atmospheric universe from that which presided over the emergence of intertextual theory in the Paris of the 1960s. While his name is virtually synonymous with subjective aesthetic response, the notion of intertextuality, first named and honed at the hands of Julia Kristeva, Roland Barthes, and Michel Foucault, is, by contrast, tightly intertwined with the idea of authorial impersonality. Yet these realms and modes of thought are not as dichotomous as they may initially appear, however starkly distinct their critical languages. Over the decades since his death, Pater’s work has given rise to considerable comment regarding his use of source material. This chapter examines Pater’s practice of ‘second-hand’ writing in ‘Style’ – in particular his borrowings from Flaubert and Maupassant – in the light of intertextual theory in comparison with the extreme citational practices of Flaubert and Joyce. Highlighting significant similarities and differences between their treatment of sources, it brings into focus the specificity of Pater’s drive to style the second-hand.

A synonym of “stealing,” swiping is a vernacular term in the comics industry and fandom used to identify and designate redrawn or traced copies of particular images and panels. As such, swiping constitutes a surprising mode of graphic transmission that implicates the gathering of particular images and their hand-drawn reproductions. The chapter recovers a history of the practice at the hand of a few smaller cases that highlight the variability of swiping as an appreciation and evaluation of copying, only to move to the central case study focusing on Charles Burns’s appropriations of “old” comics panels, mostly from pre-Code romance and horror comic books to Tintin. It is interested not only in how Burns redraws comic book images but also in how he constructs and publicly shares archives of reusable images that are constantly redistributed in his work, especially in his small-press publications. The chapter argues that Burns’s citational tactics function less as postmodern rewriting than as an adaptation of swiping practices from comic book culture, a transmission of a way of redrawing images.

In 2018, Lauren Alaina released her single “Ladies in the ’90s,” which takes a nostalgic look at her childhood through cleverly chosen lyrics from chart-topping songs of the 1990s. “Ladies in the ’90s” references women—and only women—from country music, as well as pop, rock, and R&B. The song establishes Lauren Alaina’s broad musical lineage and evokes nostalgia for an earlier decade. This chapter explores the performative and affective use of nostalgia and lineage in country music. A close reading of “Ladies in the ’90s” reveals how the generation of country artists coming of age in the second decade of the twenty-first century are redefining and expanding the stylistic, cultural, and even racial boundaries of the genre through the nostalgic tropes that have been used for decades in country music. In so doing, artists like Lauren Alaina are challenging the industry and carving out new musical and narrative spaces.

In this chapter, the contributions of the minoritized languages Zazaki and Uyghur shore up a theoretical battle for philosophical ‘monsters’, specifically introducing radical revisions to semantic models of reported speech and attitude reports. In particular, these languages exhibit the phenomenon of indexical shift, whereby elements such as first-person pronouns in indirect quotations can refer to the matrix subject (and not the speaker themself), although with highly intricate constraints on when, some language-specific and some apparently universal.

A breakdown of Cicero’s quotation of Latin poetry according to the genre in which he was writing: philosophy, oratory, speeches (Pro Roscio Amerino, Pro Murena, Pro Sestio, Pro Caelio), letters.

Discussion of Cicero’s use of Latin poetry (Lucilius’ Satires, Ennius’ Annales) as evidence of Roman history. Discussion of Cicero’s conceptualization of Latin poetry as artefact of Roman culture.

Discussion of Cicero’s quotations from Roman comedy in the context of contemporary trends of Roman scholarship which used comedy as the site of linguistic and philosophical analysis. Discussion of Cicero’s preference for Terence over Plautus. Discussion of the influence of Lucius Aelius Stilo’s scholarly methods upon his students, Cicero and Varro. Discussion of Cicero’s use of Roman comedy to define “good Latin”, and to establish philosophical definitions in Latin.

An exploration of the cultural mechanism of quotation in modernity and antiquity. An overview of the process of ancient poetic fragmentation (how fragments of poetry are made) and a brief history of scholarly editions and collections of Latin poetic fragments. An overview of techniques used by Cicero to quote poetry, and the impact of his methods upon the modern understanding of fragmentary Latin poetry.

An overview of Cicero’s engagment with Latin poetry with discussion of Cicero’s preferential interest in certain poets over others. Discussion of Cicero’s quotation of different Latin poets (Ennius, Pacuvius, Accius, Terence, Lucilius) and different genres of Latin poetry (epic, tragedy, comedy, satire), including Cicero’s aversion to the quotation of contemporary poets and neoterics. Discussion of Cicero’s own poetic compositions and practices of self-citation. An overview of Cicero’s quotation of Greek poets (Homer, Euripides, Sophocles, Leonidas of Tarentum, Aeschylus, Callimachus, Hesiod, Menander, Pindar, Archilochus, Stesichorus) and proverbs. Discussion of Cicero’s Latin translations of Greek poets (Aratus, Euripides, Homer, Aeschylus, Sophocles). Discussion of Cicero’s quotations of poetry from memory versus from a book.

Discussion of Cicero’s quotation of lyrics from Roman tragedy - particularly Accius’ Philocteta and Ennius’ Andromacha - in the Tusculan Disputations as part of philosophical argument against the vocalization of pain. Discussion of Cicero’s understanding of the musicality, melody, and pitch of Roman tragic song, and the use of song as part of philosophical argumentation.

The single most important of the conditions for the availability of the exception is that the quotation be ‘compatible with fair practice’. As noted in Chapter 2, it was the introduction of the concept of fair practice that enabled the parties to agree on a quotation exception. Previous attempts to reach an international consensus, which had sought to limit quotation by reference to type of work, extent of taking or purpose had failed to provide a sufficiently flexible criterion. The concept of ‘fair practice’ (or ‘bons usages’) proved the magic solution.

Imagine an international instrument that does not merely oblige contracting parties to confer rights on copyright holders (permitting only optional, narrowly circumscribed, exceptions) but also mandates limitations. Imagine, too, that such an instrument requires parties to permit use of material that has been taken from existing works and incorporated in a later work, irrespective of the purpose of so doing, but only on the condition that the use is in accordance with fair practice. Imagine that the mandatory limitation allows the reuse of transformed versions of works, including parodies, and even the whole of a protected work. Imagine, indeed, a regime of global, mandatory, fair use.

As has been argued, Article 10(1) Berne mandates a quotation exception that we describe as global, mandatory fair use. It is global because of the reach of Berne and TRIPS. It creates a mandatory exception because of the clear language of the provision and its travaux. It relates to ‘use’ that is not limited by type of work, type of act, or purpose and which ‘quotation’ should be understood broadly. Finally, it is ‘fair’ use because the conditions of Article 10 – namely, the work having been lawfully made available to the public, attribution, proportionality, and fair practice must be satisfied. In particular, the requirement of ‘fair practice’ embraces a range of normative considerations relating to economic and moral harm, distributive justice, freedom of expression and, in limited situations, custom.

We turn now to the important question of what constitutes a ‘quotation’. Clearly, the breadth of the concept of ‘quotation’ will affect the scope of any quotation exception and so it is vital to identify what can be characterised as quotation. Our central argument in this chapter is that the concept of ‘quotation’ in Article 10(1) is far wider than the ‘typical’ case of textual quotation and that the attributes of ‘typical’ quotation must not be elevated to conditions for the availability of the exception.