<rdf:RDF xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#" xmlns:dcterms="http://purl.org/dc/terms/">
<rdf:Description rdf:about="https://chaucer.lib.utsa.edu/items/show/267049">
    <dcterms:title><![CDATA[Eating Griselda]]></dcterms:title>
    <dcterms:description><![CDATA[Assesses Griselda of ClT in light of the folkloric tradition of the &quot;Chichevache,&quot; said to have eaten ideal wives in medieval Europe. Includes visual representations of the legendary beast and describes the relations of ClT to its sources.]]></dcterms:description>
    <dcterms:description><![CDATA[In Japanese.]]></dcterms:description>
</rdf:Description><rdf:Description rdf:about="https://chaucer.lib.utsa.edu/items/show/267478">
    <dcterms:title><![CDATA[Eating the Book : Reading and the Formation of the Devout Subject in Late Medieval England]]></dcterms:title>
    <dcterms:description><![CDATA[In the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries, the English laity became increasingly literate, in part because readers consumed religious literature to increase their devotion and to achieve personal relationship with God. PrT and SNT, among other medieval works, demonstrate the Christian laity&#039;s need for vernacular reading ability.]]></dcterms:description>
</rdf:Description><rdf:Description rdf:about="https://chaucer.lib.utsa.edu/items/show/272947">
    <dcterms:title><![CDATA[Eccles Street and Canterbury: An Approach to Molly Bloom]]></dcterms:title>
    <dcterms:description><![CDATA[Argues that the Wife of Bath is a distant source (not necessarily intentional) for the characterization of Molly Bloom in James Joyce&#039;s &quot;Ulysses.&quot; Both characters are sensual, hedonistic, heterodox, touched by despair, shrewish, and unfaithful--part of a long tradition of literary women.]]></dcterms:description>
</rdf:Description><rdf:Description rdf:about="https://chaucer.lib.utsa.edu/items/show/269348">
    <dcterms:title><![CDATA[Echoes of Boethius and Dante in Chaucer&#039;s Troilus and Criseyde]]></dcterms:title>
    <dcterms:description><![CDATA[Shows how allusions to Dante in TC combine with Boethian elements to offer an ironic commentary on Troilus&#039;s notion of happiness. Also comments on allusions to Statius.]]></dcterms:description>
</rdf:Description><rdf:Description rdf:about="https://chaucer.lib.utsa.edu/items/show/269963">
    <dcterms:title><![CDATA[Echoes of Communal Response in the Tale of Melibee]]></dcterms:title>
    <dcterms:description><![CDATA[Through extensive use of &quot;multiple dialogue introducers,&quot; Chaucer creates a &quot;mimetic representation of speech&quot; in Mel and  thus invites a listening audience to be part of the fictional conversation and, beyond that, to emulate it by taking time to &quot;pause, consider, and discuss before acting.&quot;]]></dcterms:description>
</rdf:Description><rdf:Description rdf:about="https://chaucer.lib.utsa.edu/items/show/265029">
    <dcterms:title><![CDATA[Echoes of Leviathan and the Harrowing of Hell in Chaucer&#039;s &#039;Man of Law&#039;s Tale&#039;]]></dcterms:title>
    <dcterms:description><![CDATA[Echoes of the Book of Job, and especially of the figure of Leviathan, in MLT reinforce the poem&#039;s thematic connection with the Harrowing of Hell.]]></dcterms:description>
</rdf:Description><rdf:Description rdf:about="https://chaucer.lib.utsa.edu/items/show/273409">
    <dcterms:title><![CDATA[Eclecticism and Its Discontents.]]></dcterms:title>
    <dcterms:description><![CDATA[Cautions editors against eclectic emendation, assessing George Kane&#039;s method and observing how its rigor is undercut by subjectivity, particularly notions of authorial &quot;genius.&quot; Uses WBP 3.838 (the Summoner jeering at the Friar) as a case study to show that this indisputably Chaucerian line is regularly emended by eclectic editors, despite scribal consistency.]]></dcterms:description>
</rdf:Description><rdf:Description rdf:about="https://chaucer.lib.utsa.edu/items/show/268613">
    <dcterms:title><![CDATA[EcoChaucer: Green Ethics and Medieval Nature]]></dcterms:title>
    <dcterms:description><![CDATA[Depicting nature as an &quot;active force,&quot; Chaucer encourages the reader to explore nature&#039;s &quot;effects on social institutions and human drives.&quot; In so doing, he balances &quot;a dis-enchanted skepticism about nature&#039;s benevolence&quot; with &quot;a canny understanding&quot; of how institutions invoke &quot;&#039;the natural&#039; to justify their own privileges.&quot;]]></dcterms:description>
</rdf:Description><rdf:Description rdf:about="https://chaucer.lib.utsa.edu/items/show/267404">
    <dcterms:title><![CDATA[Ecocriticism and Middle English Literature]]></dcterms:title>
    <dcterms:description><![CDATA[Ecocriticism is &quot;a discipline that examines (criticizes) the relationship of texts to literal and figurative environments.&quot; Douglass&#039;s test case is an examination of how metaphors of nature are used in KnT and MilT to set off the person of Emilye, the characters of Palamon and Arcite, and the youthful energy of Alisoun. Also explores how implied natural settings relate to the conventions of romance and fabliau.]]></dcterms:description>
</rdf:Description><rdf:Description rdf:about="https://chaucer.lib.utsa.edu/items/show/271342">
    <dcterms:title><![CDATA[Ecofeminism and the Father of English Poetry: Chaucer&#039;s &#039;Parliament of Fowls&#039;]]></dcterms:title>
    <dcterms:description><![CDATA[Describes how Chaucer reaches beyond the phallocentrism and &quot;human parochialism&quot; of his time by giving voice to the feminine and the animal in PF, even though the poem ends with a return to masculinist, human-centered subjectivity.]]></dcterms:description>
</rdf:Description><rdf:Description rdf:about="https://chaucer.lib.utsa.edu/items/show/271502">
    <dcterms:title><![CDATA[Ecofeminist Subjectivities: Chaucer&#039;s Talking Birds]]></dcterms:title>
    <dcterms:description><![CDATA[Assuming a consistent narrative voice across the Chaucer canon, this study treats Chaucer&#039;s use of animal, specifically, avian, discourse as a means of exploring subjectivity. The author emphasizes the role of non-humans and women in &quot;challenging identities and preconceptions,&quot; noting how investing these speakers with agency works to alter genre and gender assumptions. Chaucer&#039;s use of animal speakers reveals &quot;his restless search for an authorial voice.&quot; Focuses on HF, PF, SqT, NPT, and ManT.]]></dcterms:description>
</rdf:Description><rdf:Description rdf:about="https://chaucer.lib.utsa.edu/items/show/267867">
    <dcterms:title><![CDATA[Economy, Representation, and the Sale of Indulgences in Late-Medieval England]]></dcterms:title>
    <dcterms:description><![CDATA[In fourteenth-century England, the sale of indulgences was supported by orthodoxy and attacked by Wycliffites. Poetic fictions transcend this simple opposition, as seen in the artful deviousness of PardT and the revitalized idealism of &quot;Piers Plowman.&quot;]]></dcterms:description>
</rdf:Description><rdf:Description rdf:about="https://chaucer.lib.utsa.edu/items/show/274148">
    <dcterms:title><![CDATA[Ecopoetics and the Origins of English Literature.]]></dcterms:title>
    <dcterms:description><![CDATA[Views &quot;Sir Gawain and the Green Knight,&quot; Malory&#039;s &quot;Morte Darthur,&quot; and CT through the lens of ecopoetics, contending that they all rely upon the interdependence of author, text, and audience; employ metonyms rather more than metaphors; play with &quot;time and nontime&quot;; and suggest that land possesses ethical subjectivity. Includes analysis of the &quot;green world&quot; evident in the opening lines of GP and the concern with &quot;elvishness&quot; in WBPT and MLT in response to the destruction of nature in KnT.]]></dcterms:description>
</rdf:Description><rdf:Description rdf:about="https://chaucer.lib.utsa.edu/items/show/268686">
    <dcterms:title><![CDATA[Edited Text and Medieval Artifact: The Auchinleck Bookshop and &#039;Charlemagne and Roland&#039; Theories, Fifty Years Later]]></dcterms:title>
    <dcterms:description><![CDATA[Critical review of two applied textual theories, exposing their weaknesses in light of recent theory and revealing their ongoing utility. Includes discussion of Laura Hibbard Loomis&#039;s arguments that Th indicates Chaucer&#039;s firsthand knowledge of the Auchinleck MS.]]></dcterms:description>
</rdf:Description><rdf:Description rdf:about="https://chaucer.lib.utsa.edu/items/show/266678">
    <dcterms:title><![CDATA[Editing All the Manuscripts of All &#039;The Canterbury Tales&#039; into Electronic Form: Is the Effort Worthwhile?]]></dcterms:title>
    <dcterms:description><![CDATA[A description of questions raised in the process of producing the first installment of the computer-assisted &quot;Canterbury Tales&quot; Project (SAC 20 [1998], no. 11), and a justification of the project.  The first installment made possible Solopova&#039;s analyses of meter and punctuation in WBP and clarified something of Chaucer&#039;s process of revision, in particular his excision of the so-called &quot;added passages&quot; from WBP.]]></dcterms:description>
</rdf:Description><rdf:Description rdf:about="https://chaucer.lib.utsa.edu/items/show/272989">
    <dcterms:title><![CDATA[Editing and Correcting]]></dcterms:title>
    <dcterms:description><![CDATA[Discusses the importance of &quot;corrections&quot; in Middle English manuscripts. In particular, addresses scribal errors and corrections in the Ellesmere and Hengwrt manuscripts.]]></dcterms:description>
</rdf:Description><rdf:Description rdf:about="https://chaucer.lib.utsa.edu/items/show/268548">
    <dcterms:title><![CDATA[Editing as Palinode : The Invention of Love and The Text of the Canterbury Tales]]></dcterms:title>
    <dcterms:description><![CDATA[Comments on the critical reception of Manly and Rickert&#039;s &quot;The Text of the Canterbury Tales&quot; (1940), exploring underlying assumptions about textual theory and gender politics. Uses Tom Stoppard&#039;s play &quot;The Invention of Love&quot; (1997) to reveal perspectives that underlie the praise of Manly&#039;s work and the occlusion of Rickert&#039;s.]]></dcterms:description>
</rdf:Description><rdf:Description rdf:about="https://chaucer.lib.utsa.edu/items/show/267646">
    <dcterms:title><![CDATA[Editing Chaucer: John Koch and the Forgotten Tradition]]></dcterms:title>
    <dcterms:description><![CDATA[Argues that John Koch ought to be considered one of the great editors of Chaucer&#039;s works, even though he is largely forgotten by Anglophone Chaucerians who downplay German contributions to the field.]]></dcterms:description>
</rdf:Description><rdf:Description rdf:about="https://chaucer.lib.utsa.edu/items/show/263577">
    <dcterms:title><![CDATA[Editing Chaucer: The Great Tradition]]></dcterms:title>
    <dcterms:description><![CDATA[A collection of essays on the editorial practices of great editors of Chaucer:  Caxton, by Beverly Boyd; Thynne, by James E. Blodgett; Stow, by Anne Hudson; Speght by Derek Pearsall; Urry, by William L. Alderson; Tyrwhitt, by B. A. Windeatt; Wright, by Thomas Ross; Furnivall, by Donald C. Baker; Skeat, by A. S. G. Edwards; Root, by Ralph Hanna, III; Manly and Rickert, by George Kane; and F. N. Robinson, by George F. Reinecke. For the twevlve essays that pertain to Chaucer, search for Editing Chaucer: The Great Tradition under the title of this volume.]]></dcterms:description>
</rdf:Description><rdf:Description rdf:about="https://chaucer.lib.utsa.edu/items/show/271427">
    <dcterms:title><![CDATA[Editing Chaucer&#039;s Early Poems: A Rationale for Virtual Copy-Text]]></dcterms:title>
    <dcterms:description><![CDATA[Proposes that a &quot;computer facilitated re-spelling of a reconstructed archetype&quot; ought to be the basis for future editions of LGW, Anel, HF, PF, and BD because the textual situations of these poems are &quot;precarious.&quot; The reconstruction would use the &quot;standard of spelling represented by the Hengwrt manuscript&quot; of CT.]]></dcterms:description>
</rdf:Description><rdf:Description rdf:about="https://chaucer.lib.utsa.edu/items/show/263349">
    <dcterms:title><![CDATA[Editing Medieval Texts: Some Developments and Problems]]></dcterms:title>
    <dcterms:description><![CDATA[Use of the Robinson second edition based on the Ellesmere MS has encouraged the neglect of many textual problems in critical studies concerning &quot;unity&quot; or &quot;idea&quot; of CT; Manly and Rickert&#039;s monumental edition is virtually ignored.  Hengwrt is a vastly superior witness of what Chaucer wrote, though lacking CYP, CTY, and passages of WBP.  Although no manuscript represents Chaucer&#039;s &quot;act of publication,&quot; each manuscript witnesses a stage in Chaucer&#039;s developing intentions.]]></dcterms:description>
</rdf:Description><rdf:Description rdf:about="https://chaucer.lib.utsa.edu/items/show/273555">
    <dcterms:title><![CDATA[Editing Middle English Texts: Spin-offs for the Oxford English Dictionary. ]]></dcterms:title>
    <dcterms:description><![CDATA[Analyzes the Wife of Bath&#039;s &quot;deceptive nature of fine outward show,&quot; in terms of her dress and clothing, as opposed to her inner purity in WBT.]]></dcterms:description>
</rdf:Description><rdf:Description rdf:about="https://chaucer.lib.utsa.edu/items/show/265160">
    <dcterms:title><![CDATA[Editing the &#039;Canterbury Tales&#039;: An Overview]]></dcterms:title>
    <dcterms:description><![CDATA[Surveys textual issues that confront editors of CT, presenting the issues as background to the &quot;Canterbury Tales&quot; Project. Considers problems of lineation, the incompleteness of the text, the role of the links, questions of early circulation,glosses, manuscript hierarchy, and issues of meter, spelling, and punctuation.]]></dcterms:description>
</rdf:Description><rdf:Description rdf:about="https://chaucer.lib.utsa.edu/items/show/266641">
    <dcterms:title><![CDATA[Editing the &#039;Canterbury Tales&#039;: Preliminary Observations]]></dcterms:title>
    <dcterms:description><![CDATA[Referring to &quot;The Wife of Bath&#039;s Prologue on CD-ROM&quot; (Studies In the Age Of Chaucer 20 [1998], no.11), Blake concludes that Hengwrt should be used as the base text for the &quot;Canterbury Tales&quot; Project.  He proposes three areas in which Hengwrt might be emended against other witnesses:  the addition to Hengwrt of substantial passages found in some other manuscripts; emendations of minor omissions and deletions from Hengwrt; and correction of the spelling of Hengwrt.]]></dcterms:description>
</rdf:Description><rdf:Description rdf:about="https://chaucer.lib.utsa.edu/items/show/270242">
    <dcterms:title><![CDATA[Editing the Middle English Manuscript]]></dcterms:title>
    <dcterms:description><![CDATA[A pedagogical introduction to the practices involved in preparing a critical edition of a Middle English text, with commentary on paleography, the language of Middle English, and the processes of textual criticism.  Includes reproductions of the early witnesses of the text of Scog (Furnivall&#039;s transcriptions of three manuscripts, the Globe edition, Skeat, and Robinson), and solutions to several problems involved in preparing an edition from these witnesses.]]></dcterms:description>
</rdf:Description></rdf:RDF>