textual criticism

(redirected from Textual critics)
Also found in: Thesaurus, Encyclopedia.
Related to Textual critics: literary criticism

textual criticism

n.
1. The study of manuscripts or printings to determine the original or most authoritative form of a text, especially of a piece of literature.
2. Literary criticism stressing close reading and detailed analysis of a particular text.

textual criticism

n
1. (Literary & Literary Critical Terms) the scholarly study of manuscripts, esp of the Bible, in an effort to establish the original text
2. (Literary & Literary Critical Terms) literary criticism emphasizing a close analysis of the text
textual critic n

low′er crit′icism

(ˈloʊ ər)
n.
Biblical criticism having as its purpose the reconstruction of the original texts of the books of the Bible. Also called textual criticism. Compare higher criticism.
[1895–1900]

textual criticism

the close study of a particular literary work in order to establish its original text. — textual critic, n.
See also: Criticism
ThesaurusAntonymsRelated WordsSynonymsLegend:
Noun1.textual criticism - comparison of a particular text with related materials in order to establish authenticity
literary criticism, criticism - a written evaluation of a work of literature
higher criticism - the scientific study of biblical writings to determine their origin and meaning
lower criticism - the study of existing manuscripts of the Scriptures in order to determine the original text
Masora, Masorah - a vast body of textual criticism of the Hebrew Scriptures including notes on features of writing and on the occurrence of certain words and on variant sources and instructions for pronunciation and other comments that were written between AD 600 and 900 by Jewish scribes in the margins or at the end of texts
Translations
References in periodicals archive ?
of North Carolina-Chapel Hill) assembles 21 articles he has published, some introductory for beginners, some highly technical for fellow textual critics, and some for scholars of early Christianity who are interested in seeing how textual criticism can be important for exegesis and for understanding the formation of Christian doctrine and the social history of the early church.
Over the years, however, many textual critics of the Hebrew Bible have questioned whether the quest for a single Urtext is a worthwhile goal given the fluidity exemplified by early manuscripts.
Undeterred by those--chiefly textual critics and historical commentators--who doubt that such an enterprise can be attempted for an ancient figure, he gives us a biography that brings the man and his times to life.
Particularly troublesome for Avalos is the fact that, despite their dogged persistence, textual critics will never ascertain the Bible's "autographs," or original books.
This article looks at how the concept of authenticity has been constructed in traditional environments, and specifically by philosophers, art conservators, textual critics, judges, and legislators.
These qualities together with the light it throws on the relationship between the Greek and the Latin text of the New Testament in the sixteenth century make it an important work to be recommended to textual critics and historians alike.
Now the concept of authorial intention has been intensely scrutinized by Anglo-American textual critics for the last several decades.
However, as Paul Werstine remarks in his article outlining the editorial history of Shakespeare, "until the twentieth century, most editors and textual critics held out little hope of recovering from the early printed versions what Shakespeare actually wrote.
Since Bradbury's novels all have origins in earlier short stories, information on how Bradbury chose and reorganized stories and wrote bridge chapters to unify a work will be of interest to textual critics.
Rather than extract instructions and strategies for reading it from the text of the Quijote itself, these textual critics and editors bring to bear presumptions of authorial sloppiness, fault, bad judgment, and other abominations, as they adopt an attitude of intellectual and "scientific" superiority over Cervantes, and hence proclaim their right to challenge and change his book.
This is doubly true for textual critics who must not only be able to read the ancient languages but have a comprehensive knowledge of the subtleties of ancient metrical practices, dialects, generic expectations, and stylistics.
Not only might textual critics be led astray by this book, but it is by no means clear why Fincke reconstructed every line in every column in the first place.