From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Former good article nomineeThe Canterbury Tales was a Language and literature good articles nominee, but did not meet the good article criteria at the time. There may be suggestions below for improving the article. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake.
Article milestones
DateProcessResult
June 6, 2012 Good article nomineeNot listed
February 2, 2018 Featured article candidateNot promoted
Current status: Former good article nominee

Unreliable Narrator

The claim in the introduction that "Chaucer created literature's first known unreliable narrator" is neither true nor supported by citation. Indeed just following the link to the wiki page Unreliable narrator shows claims of earlier texts (including Arabian Nights) featuring unreliable narrators, with citations to back them up.

Clearly this article should be at least semi-protected

It contains a ton of 'coded language', has a long history of vandalism, and I'm pretty sure the country of Niger (capitalise that next time, please!) doesn't possess 'buttcheeks'.

Have any of the regular contributors considered changing the main image for this article?

I'm pretty sure someone was making a pun but maybe the Ellesmere manuscript cover would be a better fit for the main image?

Query

What is the reasoning behind deleting WP England: the author is English, the story begins in Surrey and ends in Kent; medieval England is not something entirely different from modern England.-- Johnsoniensis ( talk) 05:55, 29 March 2020 (UTC) Reply reply

I completely apologize. I reacted to the "low" importance, it seemed more like "mid" to me. Feel free to restore whatever you think meets with the qualifications for that topic. —DIYeditor ( talk) 06:02, 29 March 2020 (UTC) Reply reply
Restored as "high" importance. —DIYeditor ( talk) 06:55, 29 March 2020 (UTC) Reply reply
This is an example of the usefulness of edit summaries; reverting for vandalism is to be done one way but if good faith can be assumed another way.-- Johnsoniensis ( talk) 19:40, 29 March 2020 (UTC) Reply reply
Yes indeed, I made quite a mistake. I saw "low" importance for this article and processed it as absurd rather than a good faith attempt to add the article to the wikiproject. I did not even take a close look at the edit. Sorry again. —DIYeditor ( talk) 20:19, 29 March 2020 (UTC) Reply reply

Adam Pinkhurst

I deleted the text reference to him in the Language section, and then undid the undo. I don't know how or when the Adam Pinkhurst attribution was inserted but it may have been done before more recent research seriously called into question his involvement as a scribe of Chaucer.

In any case, the section is about Language, with orthographic detail about the final -e. So the key information here is the use of scribes in general. It doesn't seem relevant to insert the name of a specific scribe, particularly if current evidence seems equivocal.

Further, the image of the the title page allegedly produced by Pinkhurst is out of place as well. The content of the Style section refers entirely to text, so how is that image relevant to that section? It is certainly relevant to the page in general. I leave it to experts to find a better place for it (with or without the specious Pinkhurst attribution). Martindo ( talk) 23:43, 18 July 2021 (UTC) Reply reply

Meter?

The #Style section describes the meter as using "a decasyllable line". However, if we look at the beginning of The Milleres Tale, as we have here at Wikisource, the lines parse out more clearly as having eleven syllables:

3109         Whan that the Knyght had thus his tale ytoold,
                    When the Knight had thus told his tale,
3110         In al the route nas ther yong ne oold
                    In all the company there was no one young nor old
3111         That he ne seyde it was a noble storie
                    Who did not say it was a noble story
3112         And worthy for to drawen to memorie,
                    And worthy to draw into memory,
3113         And namely the gentils everichon.
                    And especially the gentlefolk every one.
3114         Oure Hooste lough and swoor, "So moot I gon,
                    Our Host laughed and swore, "As I may move about (I swear),
3115         This gooth aright; unbokeled is the male.
                    This goes well; the bag is opened.
3116         Lat se now who shal telle another tale;
                    Let's see now who shall tell another tale;
3117         For trewely the game is wel bigonne.
                    For truly the game is well begun.
3118         Now telleth ye, sir Monk, if that ye konne,
                    Now tell you, sir Monk, if you can,
3119         Somwhat to quite with the Knyghtes tale."
                    Something to equal the Knight's tale."

Some of these lines are harder to parse for meter, but many seem work out to more than ten syllables -- it seems like eleven is more where things usually land, with an unstressed start and unstressed end. Here's my take at this, with (my understanding of the) stress indicated with bold:

That he ne seyde it was a noble storie
— omitting the unstressed "e" on the end of seyde, or subsuming that into the following "i"
And worthy for to drawen to memorie,
And namely the gentils everichon.
— crushing the "veri" in everichon
— with no unstressed ending syllable, this line and the next seem to be ten syllables each
Oure Hooste lough and swoor, "So moot I gon,
— crushing the unstressed "e" on the end of oure
This gooth aright; unbokeled is the male.
— crushing the unstressed "e"s on the end of unbokeled
Lat se now who shal telle another tale;
— omitting the unstressed "e" on the end of telle, or subsuming that into the following "a"
For trewely the game is wel bigonne.
— omitting the unstressed "e" on the end of game, or subsuming that into the following "i"
Now telleth ye, sir Monk, if that ye konne,

I am not sure how knyght is supposed to be parsed: is this meant to be two syllables, like /k.ˈniːçt/, or one syllable like /ˈkniːçt/? The latter seems more likely, but I am unsure, and this would change the scansion of a couple of the lines.

At any rate, I struggle to see how the above conforms consistently with the " decasyllable line" description in the #Style section. Could someone please explain? ‑‑  Eiríkr Útlendi │ Tala við mig 22:38, 3 June 2022 (UTC) Reply reply

Good point. Norman Davies, 'Language and Versification', in The Riverside Chaucer, ed. by Larry D. Benson, 3rd edn (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1987), pp. xxv-xli (pp. xxxix-xl) characterises Chaucer's dominant metre in the Canterbury Tales instead as being five-stress lines, with stressed usually alternating with what Davies calls 'light' syllables. In Davies's account, this results in lines usually of ten or eleven, but occasionally of nine, syllables. I'll edit accordingly. Alarichall ( talk) 13:50, 6 June 2022 (UTC) Reply reply
@ Alarichall, thank you! The updated description makes more sense and is more informative. Much appreciated! ‑‑  Eiríkr Útlendi │ Tala við mig 17:39, 6 June 2022 (UTC) Reply reply
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Former good article nomineeThe Canterbury Tales was a Language and literature good articles nominee, but did not meet the good article criteria at the time. There may be suggestions below for improving the article. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake.
Article milestones
DateProcessResult
June 6, 2012 Good article nomineeNot listed
February 2, 2018 Featured article candidateNot promoted
Current status: Former good article nominee

Unreliable Narrator

The claim in the introduction that "Chaucer created literature's first known unreliable narrator" is neither true nor supported by citation. Indeed just following the link to the wiki page Unreliable narrator shows claims of earlier texts (including Arabian Nights) featuring unreliable narrators, with citations to back them up.

Clearly this article should be at least semi-protected

It contains a ton of 'coded language', has a long history of vandalism, and I'm pretty sure the country of Niger (capitalise that next time, please!) doesn't possess 'buttcheeks'.

Have any of the regular contributors considered changing the main image for this article?

I'm pretty sure someone was making a pun but maybe the Ellesmere manuscript cover would be a better fit for the main image?

Query

What is the reasoning behind deleting WP England: the author is English, the story begins in Surrey and ends in Kent; medieval England is not something entirely different from modern England.-- Johnsoniensis ( talk) 05:55, 29 March 2020 (UTC) Reply reply

I completely apologize. I reacted to the "low" importance, it seemed more like "mid" to me. Feel free to restore whatever you think meets with the qualifications for that topic. —DIYeditor ( talk) 06:02, 29 March 2020 (UTC) Reply reply
Restored as "high" importance. —DIYeditor ( talk) 06:55, 29 March 2020 (UTC) Reply reply
This is an example of the usefulness of edit summaries; reverting for vandalism is to be done one way but if good faith can be assumed another way.-- Johnsoniensis ( talk) 19:40, 29 March 2020 (UTC) Reply reply
Yes indeed, I made quite a mistake. I saw "low" importance for this article and processed it as absurd rather than a good faith attempt to add the article to the wikiproject. I did not even take a close look at the edit. Sorry again. —DIYeditor ( talk) 20:19, 29 March 2020 (UTC) Reply reply

Adam Pinkhurst

I deleted the text reference to him in the Language section, and then undid the undo. I don't know how or when the Adam Pinkhurst attribution was inserted but it may have been done before more recent research seriously called into question his involvement as a scribe of Chaucer.

In any case, the section is about Language, with orthographic detail about the final -e. So the key information here is the use of scribes in general. It doesn't seem relevant to insert the name of a specific scribe, particularly if current evidence seems equivocal.

Further, the image of the the title page allegedly produced by Pinkhurst is out of place as well. The content of the Style section refers entirely to text, so how is that image relevant to that section? It is certainly relevant to the page in general. I leave it to experts to find a better place for it (with or without the specious Pinkhurst attribution). Martindo ( talk) 23:43, 18 July 2021 (UTC) Reply reply

Meter?

The #Style section describes the meter as using "a decasyllable line". However, if we look at the beginning of The Milleres Tale, as we have here at Wikisource, the lines parse out more clearly as having eleven syllables:

3109         Whan that the Knyght had thus his tale ytoold,
                    When the Knight had thus told his tale,
3110         In al the route nas ther yong ne oold
                    In all the company there was no one young nor old
3111         That he ne seyde it was a noble storie
                    Who did not say it was a noble story
3112         And worthy for to drawen to memorie,
                    And worthy to draw into memory,
3113         And namely the gentils everichon.
                    And especially the gentlefolk every one.
3114         Oure Hooste lough and swoor, "So moot I gon,
                    Our Host laughed and swore, "As I may move about (I swear),
3115         This gooth aright; unbokeled is the male.
                    This goes well; the bag is opened.
3116         Lat se now who shal telle another tale;
                    Let's see now who shall tell another tale;
3117         For trewely the game is wel bigonne.
                    For truly the game is well begun.
3118         Now telleth ye, sir Monk, if that ye konne,
                    Now tell you, sir Monk, if you can,
3119         Somwhat to quite with the Knyghtes tale."
                    Something to equal the Knight's tale."

Some of these lines are harder to parse for meter, but many seem work out to more than ten syllables -- it seems like eleven is more where things usually land, with an unstressed start and unstressed end. Here's my take at this, with (my understanding of the) stress indicated with bold:

That he ne seyde it was a noble storie
— omitting the unstressed "e" on the end of seyde, or subsuming that into the following "i"
And worthy for to drawen to memorie,
And namely the gentils everichon.
— crushing the "veri" in everichon
— with no unstressed ending syllable, this line and the next seem to be ten syllables each
Oure Hooste lough and swoor, "So moot I gon,
— crushing the unstressed "e" on the end of oure
This gooth aright; unbokeled is the male.
— crushing the unstressed "e"s on the end of unbokeled
Lat se now who shal telle another tale;
— omitting the unstressed "e" on the end of telle, or subsuming that into the following "a"
For trewely the game is wel bigonne.
— omitting the unstressed "e" on the end of game, or subsuming that into the following "i"
Now telleth ye, sir Monk, if that ye konne,

I am not sure how knyght is supposed to be parsed: is this meant to be two syllables, like /k.ˈniːçt/, or one syllable like /ˈkniːçt/? The latter seems more likely, but I am unsure, and this would change the scansion of a couple of the lines.

At any rate, I struggle to see how the above conforms consistently with the " decasyllable line" description in the #Style section. Could someone please explain? ‑‑  Eiríkr Útlendi │ Tala við mig 22:38, 3 June 2022 (UTC) Reply reply

Good point. Norman Davies, 'Language and Versification', in The Riverside Chaucer, ed. by Larry D. Benson, 3rd edn (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1987), pp. xxv-xli (pp. xxxix-xl) characterises Chaucer's dominant metre in the Canterbury Tales instead as being five-stress lines, with stressed usually alternating with what Davies calls 'light' syllables. In Davies's account, this results in lines usually of ten or eleven, but occasionally of nine, syllables. I'll edit accordingly. Alarichall ( talk) 13:50, 6 June 2022 (UTC) Reply reply
@ Alarichall, thank you! The updated description makes more sense and is more informative. Much appreciated! ‑‑  Eiríkr Útlendi │ Tala við mig 17:39, 6 June 2022 (UTC) Reply reply

Videos

Youtube | Vimeo | Bing

Websites

Google | Yahoo | Bing

Encyclopedia

Google | Yahoo | Bing

Facebook