Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-dzt6s Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-28T04:21:35.586Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

A Comment on Criticism in the Cinquecento

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  14 December 2021

Walter L. Bullock
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

An abstract is not available for this content so a preview has been provided. Please use the Get access link above for information on how to access this content.
Image of the first page of this content. For PDF version, please use the ‘Save PDF’ preceeding this image.'
Type
Comment And Criticism
Information
PMLA , Volume 42 , Issue 4 , December 1927 , pp. 1057 - 1060
Copyright
Copyright © Modern Language Association of America, 1927

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 PMLA, XLI, 575–619.

2 Ciro Trabalza (La Crilica Letteraria, Milano, Francesco Vallardi, 1915, p. 79) makes a very natural slip in asserting that a French translation was published in 1542. In 1542 appeared at Lyons an anonymous translation of two other dialogues of Speroni; the Dialogo dette Lingue, however, was not printed before Grunet's version of 1551.

3 I note that in Ruscelli's ponderous Commentarii della Lingua Italiana Venetia, Zenaro, 1581, Miss Pope might have found more weighty matter on her subject than in his dedicatory letter for Minturno's Rime, which alone she quotes (and unhappily much mistranslates).

4 I. e. the poet in general (or, possibly, Dante). Certainly not Boccaccio, who followed Petrarch, and (as Muzio carefully suggests both in this passage and in the Battaglie) gathered extremely few “tares”.