Who is speaking?
This article, taking as its point of departure Julia Kristeva's problem of intertextuality posing as banal source criticism, discusses the problems of intertextuality masquerading as an indicator of textual influence. It is suggested that much of the work done under the rubric of intertextualit...
Main Author: | |
---|---|
Format: | Electronic Article |
Language: | English |
Check availability: | HBZ Gateway |
Journals Online & Print: | |
Interlibrary Loan: | Interlibrary Loan for the Fachinformationsdienste (Specialized Information Services in Germany) |
Published: |
1996
|
In: |
Neotestamentica
Year: 1996, Volume: 30, Issue: 2, Pages: 427-449 |
Further subjects: | B
Theology
B Redaction Criticism B Historical criticism B Intertextuality B Reader-response criticism B Christianity B Source Criticism |
Online Access: |
Volltext (JSTOR) Volltext (kostenfrei) Volltext (kostenfrei) |
Summary: | This article, taking as its point of departure Julia Kristeva's problem of intertextuality posing as banal source criticism, discusses the problems of intertextuality masquerading as an indicator of textual influence. It is suggested that much of the work done under the rubric of intertextuality rather fits source or redaction criticism. As a dialogue of voices, intertextuality implies that on each text falls the reflection of other texts, leading to an uncontrollable interaction between texts, thereby destroying the monological concept of language and meaning. Textual influence, regarded as an indication of a unidirectional causality, is not intertextuality's cross reference. It is suggested that source and redaction criticism fall under the rubric of textual influence and cannot serve as an indication for intertextuality because of a difference in their views on the role of the human being in the information process, the text as object and the problem of referentiality. |
---|---|
ISSN: | 2518-4628 |
Contains: | Enthalten in: Neotestamentica
|
Persistent identifiers: | DOI: 10.10520/AJA2548356_476 |