<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/265293">
    <dcterms:title><![CDATA[The Language and Expressions of Chaucer&#039;s &#039;Knight&#039;s Tale&#039;]]></dcterms:title>
    <dcterms:description><![CDATA[Surveys stylistic characteristics of KnT including abbreviation, parallel expression, repetition of synonyms, alliteratation, catalogs, similes, and archaisms.]]></dcterms:description>
</rdf:Description><rdf:Description rdf:about="https://chaucer.lib.utsa.edu/items/show/271439">
    <dcterms:title><![CDATA[The Language Group of the &#039;Canterbury Tales&#039;]]></dcterms:title>
    <dcterms:description><![CDATA[In their attention to language as &quot;an active part of social life,&quot; the FranT, NPT, and ManT constitute a language group whose tales are deeply rhetorical in the sense that they look closely at how language works as &quot;an entity, process or phenomenon,&quot; illustrating, as often, &quot;linguistic failure.&quot;  Concerns of the language group extend to the whole of the CT.  Some discussion of the Host, ClT, and PardT.]]></dcterms:description>
</rdf:Description><rdf:Description rdf:about="https://chaucer.lib.utsa.edu/items/show/272784">
    <dcterms:title><![CDATA[The Language of &#039;The Romaunt of the Rose&#039; (Fragment A), with Particular Reference to Chaucer&#039;s Relationship to Middle English Provincial Poetry]]></dcterms:title>
    <dcterms:description><![CDATA[Adduces examples of formulaic phrasing, diction, and rhymes in fragment A of Rom as evidence of Chaucer&#039;s familiarity with native English literature; also shows where such evidence appears in his later works.]]></dcterms:description>
</rdf:Description><rdf:Description rdf:about="https://chaucer.lib.utsa.edu/items/show/272326">
    <dcterms:title><![CDATA[The Language of Abuse: Marital Violence in Later Medieval England]]></dcterms:title>
    <dcterms:description><![CDATA[Social and legal history of violence against women in the medieval family, including discussion of case studies. Comments briefly on MerT and ClT, and discusses at greater length (pp. 230-36) WBP which indicates that &quot;failure to internalise and impose social roles of governance may have been thought to produce scolding wives.&quot; Viewed as a scold, the Wife &quot;confirms the need for husbands to govern judiciously and even-handedly&quot;; otherwise they hazard a &quot;lifetime of misery.&quot;]]></dcterms:description>
</rdf:Description><rdf:Description rdf:about="https://chaucer.lib.utsa.edu/items/show/276374">
    <dcterms:title><![CDATA[The Language of Chance.]]></dcterms:title>
    <dcterms:description><![CDATA[Tallies possible evidence of &quot;early probability calculus&quot; in Middle English literature and its lexicon, including discussion of examples from John Gower, John Lydgate, and PardT. In the latter, line 6.653, chances in dicing are &quot;events which had the same weight or probability.&quot;]]></dcterms:description>
</rdf:Description><rdf:Description rdf:about="https://chaucer.lib.utsa.edu/items/show/275065">
    <dcterms:title><![CDATA[The Language of Chaucer.]]></dcterms:title>
    <dcterms:description><![CDATA[Addresses the status of Chaucer&#039;s language in the development of a standard written English, explores grammatical differences between his dialect and &quot;present-day&quot; English, and clarifies the difficulties of understanding the innovativeness of his lexicon in light of the complications of borrowings from French. Describes tools available for further study of these aspects of Chaucer&#039;s language.]]></dcterms:description>
</rdf:Description><rdf:Description rdf:about="https://chaucer.lib.utsa.edu/items/show/272189">
    <dcterms:title><![CDATA[The Language of Chaucer&#039;s Poetry: An Appraisal of the Verse, Style, and Structure]]></dcterms:title>
    <dcterms:description><![CDATA[Evaluates the &quot;style and structure&quot; of Chaucer&#039;s poetry, exploring the interaction of pronunciation and versification and the limitations of medieval and modern rhetorics for describing and gauging Chaucer&#039;s techniques. Includes scansion of lines and section, attention to tone, register, precision of diction, juxtaposition, cohesion, closure, and various other stylistic and structural features. An index indicates where various topics and techniques are considered in this study.]]></dcterms:description>
</rdf:Description><rdf:Description rdf:about="https://chaucer.lib.utsa.edu/items/show/267189">
    <dcterms:title><![CDATA[The Language of Costume in the Ellesmere Portraits]]></dcterms:title>
    <dcterms:description><![CDATA[Examines historical and symbolic features of the costumes of select Ellesmere portraits (Squire, Knight, Merchant, Prioress, Monk, Parson, Cook, and Chaucer), arguing that the sequence is an &quot;informed response&quot; to CT, especially GP. Chaucer is depicted as a figure from history, while the others are presented in fifteenth-century fashion. Includes eight black-and-white illustrations.]]></dcterms:description>
</rdf:Description><rdf:Description rdf:about="https://chaucer.lib.utsa.edu/items/show/265413">
    <dcterms:title><![CDATA[The Language of Criseyde in Chaucer&#039;s &#039;Troilus and Criseyde&#039; (I)]]></dcterms:title>
    <dcterms:description><![CDATA[Jimura compares the vocabulary of Criseyde to that of Troilus and Pandarus, seeking to define characteristics of aristocratic women&#039;s language in the fourteenth century. ]]></dcterms:description>
    <dcterms:description><![CDATA[Part I examines swearing, interjections, and oaths; pt. II intensive adverbs, adjectives, and the words &quot;estat&quot; and &quot;honour.&quot;]]></dcterms:description>
    <dcterms:description><![CDATA[Part II appears in Kiichiro Nakatani, et al., eds.  English and English Teaching: A Festschrift in Honour of Hisashi Takahashi and Jiro Igarashi (Hiroshima: (Hiroshima University, Department of English, Faculty of the School of Education, 1993), pp. 187-97.]]></dcterms:description>
    <dcterms:description><![CDATA[Includes word-frequency tables.]]></dcterms:description>
</rdf:Description><rdf:Description rdf:about="https://chaucer.lib.utsa.edu/items/show/265414">
    <dcterms:title><![CDATA[The Language of Criseyde in Chaucer&#039;s &#039;Troilus and Criseyde&#039; (II)]]></dcterms:title>
    <dcterms:description><![CDATA[Jimura compares the vocabulary of Criseyde to that of Troilus and Pandarus, seeking to define characteristics of aristocratic women&#039;s language in the fourteenth century. ]]></dcterms:description>
    <dcterms:description><![CDATA[Part I examines swearing, interjections, and oaths; pt. II intensive adverbs, adjectives, and the words &quot;estat&quot; and &quot;honour.&quot;]]></dcterms:description>
    <dcterms:description><![CDATA[Includes word-frequency tables.]]></dcterms:description>
    <dcterms:description><![CDATA[Part I appears in Nobuyuki Yuasa, et al., eds. Essays in English language and Literature in Honour of Michio Kawai (Tokyo: Eihosha, 1993), pp. 53-60.]]></dcterms:description>
</rdf:Description><rdf:Description rdf:about="https://chaucer.lib.utsa.edu/items/show/266023">
    <dcterms:title><![CDATA[The Language of Criseyde in Chaucer&#039;s &#039;Troilus and Criseyde&#039; (III)]]></dcterms:title>
    <dcterms:description><![CDATA[A sociolinguistic exploration of Criseyde&#039;s grammar, literacy, pronunciation, and verbosity, considered in relation to the vocabulary and syntax of fourteenth-century upper-class women. ]]></dcterms:description>
    <dcterms:description><![CDATA[Includes word-count tables.]]></dcterms:description>
</rdf:Description><rdf:Description rdf:about="https://chaucer.lib.utsa.edu/items/show/264224">
    <dcterms:title><![CDATA[The Language of Equivocation: Some Chaucerian Techniques]]></dcterms:title>
    <dcterms:description><![CDATA[Chaucer developed a poetic idiom of ubiquitous equivocal effects and prevarication both in the comments of his persona and in the voices of his speakers.  Poems touched on include TC, PardT, NPT, MerT, and LGW.]]></dcterms:description>
</rdf:Description><rdf:Description rdf:about="https://chaucer.lib.utsa.edu/items/show/275804">
    <dcterms:title><![CDATA[The Language of Love in Chaucer.]]></dcterms:title>
    <dcterms:description><![CDATA[Describes and assesses Chaucer&#039;s depictions of the expressions and psychology of love in TC, attending to diction, tone, style, and various uses and developments of the conventions of French and Italian love poetry. Focuses on the poet&#039;s successful rendering of the inner psychology of love, his uses of high style, and the &quot;emotionalized tone of femininity&quot; in his characterizations of both Troilus and Criseyde. Also comments on BD.]]></dcterms:description>
</rdf:Description><rdf:Description rdf:about="https://chaucer.lib.utsa.edu/items/show/277327">
    <dcterms:title><![CDATA[The Language of Love in Chaucer&#039;s Miller&#039;s and Reeve&#039;s Tales and in the Old French Fabliaux. ]]></dcterms:title>
    <dcterms:description><![CDATA[Identifies predecessors in Old French fabliaux for courtly details, diction, locutions, and situations in MilT and RvT, helping to create comic irony by contrast between &quot;elegance and &#039;harlotrye.&#039;&quot;]]></dcterms:description>
</rdf:Description><rdf:Description rdf:about="https://chaucer.lib.utsa.edu/items/show/265430">
    <dcterms:title><![CDATA[The Language of Middle English Literature]]></dcterms:title>
    <dcterms:description><![CDATA[An annotated bibliography of 1,335 studies, arranged chronologically (1865-1900) within three broad categories:  Early Middle English, Later Middle English, and dissertations.  Includes studies in which &quot;linguistic description has been used to cast light upon the function of language for literary effect.&quot;]]></dcterms:description>
    <dcterms:description><![CDATA[Annotations range from a brief sentence to lengthy paragraphs. Excludes studies that pertain primarily to Chaucer, but the subject index lists thirty-seven items in which Chaucer&#039;s works are a significant concern.  Also includes a descriptive introduction and an author index.]]></dcterms:description>
</rdf:Description><rdf:Description rdf:about="https://chaucer.lib.utsa.edu/items/show/268046">
    <dcterms:title><![CDATA[The Language of Politeness in Chaucer: An Analysis of the Use of Linguistic Features Reflecting Social and Interpersonal Relationships]]></dcterms:title>
    <dcterms:description><![CDATA[Examines the indicators of politeness and social categories (class, degree of intimacy, etc.) in the speech of romance characters in CT and TC, with attention to forms of address and second-person pronouns (ye/thou). Also considers politeness strategies in relation to literary genre and pragmatic function (e.g., pleas and imperatives), arguing that formal description without attention to conditioning factors cannot succeed in capturing the nuances of politeness. Ph.D. thesis, University of Sheffield, 1992.]]></dcterms:description>
</rdf:Description><rdf:Description rdf:about="https://chaucer.lib.utsa.edu/items/show/277257">
    <dcterms:title><![CDATA[The Language of Prayer in Middle English, 1200-1400.]]></dcterms:title>
    <dcterms:description><![CDATA[Identifies &quot;nine components commonly found in prayers,&quot; exploring their presence in various devotional poems in Middle English and interpolated in narrative works by the &quot;Gawain&quot;-poet, Langland, Gower, and Chaucer, observing superior style in the latter group and instances where narrators interrupt prayer &quot;to relate it to the narrative situation.&quot;]]></dcterms:description>
</rdf:Description><rdf:Description rdf:about="https://chaucer.lib.utsa.edu/items/show/272596">
    <dcterms:title><![CDATA[The Language of Renaissance Poetry: Spenser, Shakespeare, Donne, Milton]]></dcterms:title>
    <dcterms:description><![CDATA[Seeks to &quot;ascertain why the diction of poetry from Chaucer to Milton has a distinct character, and one unlikely to be revived.&quot; Chapter 2, &quot;Chaucer and His Successors&quot; (pp. 28-38), assesses Chaucer as &quot;the first English poet with a style recognizably his own,&quot; considering issues of style and versification and the establishment of a &quot;Chaucerian tradition.&quot; Comments on Chaucer&#039;s influence on Renaissance writers occur throughout the volume.]]></dcterms:description>
</rdf:Description><rdf:Description rdf:about="https://chaucer.lib.utsa.edu/items/show/261418">
    <dcterms:title><![CDATA[The Language of Romance in Sir Thopas--Chaucer&#039;s Dual Sense of the Code]]></dcterms:title>
    <dcterms:description><![CDATA[Discusses the language of romance in Th, focusing on seven types of &quot;deviation.&quot;]]></dcterms:description>
</rdf:Description><rdf:Description rdf:about="https://chaucer.lib.utsa.edu/items/show/261492">
    <dcterms:title><![CDATA[The Language of Sir Thopas and Its Scribal Variants]]></dcterms:title>
    <dcterms:description><![CDATA[Collates variants of all manuscripts of Th, distinguishing the features of Hengwrt.  (In Japanese).]]></dcterms:description>
</rdf:Description><rdf:Description rdf:about="https://chaucer.lib.utsa.edu/items/show/264735">
    <dcterms:title><![CDATA[The Language of Some Fifteenth-Century Chaucerians: A Study of Manuscript Variants in the &#039;Canterbury Tales&#039;]]></dcterms:title>
    <dcterms:description><![CDATA[The four volumes of manuscript variants added to the Manly-Rickert edition of CT have been neglected too long.]]></dcterms:description>
</rdf:Description><rdf:Description rdf:about="https://chaucer.lib.utsa.edu/items/show/277591">
    <dcterms:title><![CDATA[The Language of the Body: An Analysis of Chaucer, Dunbar and Henryson.]]></dcterms:title>
    <dcterms:description><![CDATA[Explores how &quot;multiple modes of discourse&quot; about the body--medical, philosophical, religious, and courtly--underlie works by Chaucer, Dunbar, and Henryson, arguing that CT, through its multiplicity of voices, &quot;demonstrates fundamental medieval anxieties about the body’s stability,&quot; &quot;how authoritative modes of discourse were used by different social types, and how their . . . claims to authoritative discourse were frequently unreliable.&quot; Also considers the &quot;language of the body&quot; in Henryson&#039;s &quot;Testament of Cresseid&quot; and Dunbar&#039;s &quot;Tretis of the Tua Marit Wemen and the Wedo,&quot; with attention to the influences of TC and WBPT respectively.]]></dcterms:description>
</rdf:Description><rdf:Description rdf:about="https://chaucer.lib.utsa.edu/items/show/268385">
    <dcterms:title><![CDATA[The Language of the Chaucer Tradition]]></dcterms:title>
    <dcterms:description><![CDATA[Horobin explores how linguistic issues affect questions of attribution, reception, and manuscript authority, focusing not only on lexicon but also on orthography, phonology, and grammar. The language of the Hengwrt manuscript of CT (perhaps produced as a text for oral presentation) is closer to Chaucer&#039;s original language than has previously been thought; the language of Ellesmere (perhaps produced for silent reading) is much more regularized. .]]></dcterms:description>
    <dcterms:description><![CDATA[Linguistic evidence in Equat does not support Chaucerian authorship, while new evidence about the London dialect suggests reconsideration of Chaucer&#039;s authorship of the B and C fragments of Rom. Fifteenth-century scribes were careful to preserve details of Chaucer&#039;s language, even archaic or dialectal features, resisting fifteenth-century movement toward a standardized English language.]]></dcterms:description>
</rdf:Description><rdf:Description rdf:about="https://chaucer.lib.utsa.edu/items/show/265760">
    <dcterms:title><![CDATA[The Language of the Ellesmere Manuscript]]></dcterms:title>
    <dcterms:description><![CDATA[Argues for the superiority of Hengwrt over Ellesmere on metrical and dialectical grounds.]]></dcterms:description>
    <dcterms:description><![CDATA[  Hengwrt, which better reflects both the Northernisms of RvT and Chaucer&#039;s admittedly difficult-to-ascertain metrical goals, should be the basis for modern editions of CT.  Hengwrt&#039;s superiority results from the fact that it &quot;was a makeshift volume assembled in some haste, whereas the Ellesmere manuscript was more carefully planned and executed.&quot;]]></dcterms:description>
    <dcterms:description><![CDATA[  Since Ellesmere is more heavily edited, Hengwrt more accurately represents &quot;the authorial original.&quot;]]></dcterms:description>
</rdf:Description><rdf:Description rdf:about="https://chaucer.lib.utsa.edu/items/show/267716">
    <dcterms:title><![CDATA[The Language of the Fifteenth-Century Printed Editions of the Canterbury Tales]]></dcterms:title>
    <dcterms:description><![CDATA[Analyzes spelling in the four printed editions of CT issued before 1500. Caxton (1476 and 1482) and Wynken de Worde (1498) responded individually to the perceived authority of the work, while Richard Pynson (1492) attempted to replace the nonstandard features of Caxton&#039;s editions with Chancery Standard forms.]]></dcterms:description>
</rdf:Description></rdf:RDF>