King Horn, Floriz and Blauncheflur, The Assumption of Our Lady
General
King Horn, Floriz and Blauncheflur, The Assumption of Our Lady
English poetry -- Middle English, 1100-1500; Mary, Blessed Virgin, Saint -- Legends; Romances, English
No doubt with his English public in mind, the English poet, in adapting
the story from the French, has modified to some extent the tenderness
and sentimentality, even at times the poetic descriptions, of his French
original (compare vv. 1117-1194 of the French with the corresponding
English vv. 457-72), and has omitted the enumeration of gems and of
precious stuffs suggestive of an elegance perhaps unintelligible to an
English speaking and hearing public at this time. The wonderful cup, to
the description of which 67 verses (431-498) are devoted in the French
romance, in the English poem is dismissed with 17 verses (163-184). The
garden so elaborately described in the French, vv. 1724-1835, in the
English poem occupies only vv. 685-732. The description of the knife
(_grafe_), which serves no other purpose than that of external adornment
in the French version (vv. 788-799), is entirely neglected in the
English translation. The translator’s method is well illustrated in the
case of the description of Floris’s equipage preliminary to setting out
on his journey. The description of the saddle and harness occupies 37
verses (964-1000) of the French poem, and is dismissed by the English
translator with 5 (vv. 382-389), _I ne can telle ȝou noȝt Hu richeliche
þe sadel was wroȝt_, and three verses following.
To sum up, the English version is a free, somewhat condensed,
translation from the French I. version. The translator has introduced
almost no new traits, and the extent of the condensation may be judged
by considering the 1296 verses of the English as compared with the 2974
verses in the French I. version. The manner of the condensation has been
indicated. But with all the condensation, especially in the descriptive
passages, it is important to note that in the essential features of the
story, the translator follows his original faithfully, so that the main
outline of the story is preserved as accurately in English as in French.
[Footnote I-20: This same consideration, as we have seen, probably
explains _in part_ the difference between the English King Horn
and the Norman French _Horn et Rigmenil_.]
§ 4. DIALECT.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account