We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
To save content items to your account,
please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies.
If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account.
Find out more about saving content to .
To save content items to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org
is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings
on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part
of your Kindle email address below.
Find out more about saving to your Kindle.
Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations.
‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi.
‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.
A commonplace of French literary history holds that around 1660 an archaic novelistic form called the roman was suddenly replaced by the nouvelle, and that this replacement amounts to the birth of the novel in a modern sense. In this quantitative analysis, I tag of a sample of novels appearing between 1601 and 1730 for a variety of characteristics long said to distinguish romans from nouvelles (length, use of inset narratives, historical setting); I add the further variables of protagonist type (drawn from history or not) and truth posture (assertions of veracity and admissions of invention). Such analysis reveals that although romans do predominate in the first half of the century while nouvelles flourish in the second, 1660 cannot be confirmed as a threshold. In fact, far from being diametrically opposed, romans and nouvelles are in many respects merely different moments in the evolution of the same basic artifact, one to be eventually replaced by the first-person forms familiar from the eighteenth century. More broadly, a quantitative approach suggests that the novel’s history should be thought of less as a story of stability and rupture than as continual — but patterned — flux.
Recommend this
Email your librarian or administrator to recommend adding this to your organisation's collection.