Part of
A Comparative History of the Literary Draft in Europe
Edited by Olga Beloborodova and Dirk Van Hulle
[Comparative History of Literatures in European Languages XXXV] 2024
► pp. 127140
References (38)
References
Aizenshtok, Iieremiia. 1922. “Izuchenie novoi ukrainskoi literatury (Zametki)” [Studies of new Ukrainian literature: Notes]. Put’ Prosveshcheniia 6: 135–162.Google Scholar
Bezruč, Petr. 2015. Slezské písně [Silesian Songs]. Prague: Institute of Czech Literature – Akropolis.Google Scholar
Borodin, Vasyl’. 2010. “Dynamika tvorchoho protsesu Shevchenka-poeta” [Dynamics of creative process in Shevchenko’s poetry]. Slovo i Chas 3: 3–29.Google Scholar
Buda, Attila, and Ágnes Major. 2019. “A Babits-versek kritikai kiadásának átalakulása, avagy a kéziratos hagyaték változásának következményei” [Changes in the critical editions of the Babits poems, or the consequences of transformations in the manuscript legacy]. Irodalomtörténet 100 (4): 435–447.Google Scholar
Červenka, Miroslav. 1971. “Textologie und Semiotik.” In Texte und Varianten. Probleme ihrer Edition und Interpretation, ed. by Gunter Martens and Hans Zeller, 143–63. München: C. H. Beck.Google Scholar
. 1995. “Textual Criticism and Semiotics.” In Contemporary German Editorial Theory, ed. by H. W. Gabler, G. Bornstein, and G. B. Pierce, 59–77. Ann Arbor: The University of Michigan Press.Google Scholar
Debreczeni, Attila. 2012. Csokonai költői életművének kronológiai rendje [The chronological order of Csokonai’s poetic oeuvre]. Csokonai Vitéz Mihály összes művei. Budapest-Debrecen: Akadémiai Kiadó-Debreceni Egyetemi Kiadó.Google Scholar
Dmitrieva, Ekaterina (ed.). 1999. Geneticheskaia kritika vo Frantsii [Genetic criticism in France]. Moscow: OGI.Google Scholar
Fylypovych, Pavlo. 1926. “Heneza dramatychnoї poemy Lesi Ukraïnky U pushchi” [Genesis of Lesia Ukraïnka’s dramatic poem In the Forest]. In Lesia Ukraïnka, Tvory, vol. 9, 7–27. [Кyiv]: Knyhospilka.Google Scholar
Gellner, František. 2012. Dílo [The Complete Writings]. Prague: Institute of Czech Literature – Akropolis.Google Scholar
Grésillon, Almuth. 1997. “Slow: Work in progress.” Word & Image 13 (2): 106–123. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Haleta, Olena. 2021. “Poet na druhomu berezi: protsesual’nist’ pys’ma u prozi Bohdana Ihoria Antonycha” [Poet on the other side: writing as a process in Bohdan Ihor Antonych’s prose]. Slovo i Chas 1: 56–71.Google Scholar
Hay, Louis, and Péter Nagy. 1982. Avant-texte, texte, après-texte. Colloque International de Textologie à Mátrafüred (Hongrie), 13–16 October 1978. Budapest-Paris: Akadémiai Kiadó-Éditions du CNRS.Google Scholar
Hnatiuk, Myroslava. 2011. Tekstolohichni studii [Textological studies]. Kyiv: VPK Ekspres-Polihraf.Google Scholar
Jedličková, Alice, and Dana Svobodová. 1989. “Jak v napsaném objevovat psaní” [To find writing in the written]. Literární Měsíčník 18 (10): 156–8.Google Scholar
Kelevéz, Ágnes. 1998. A keletkező szöveg esztétikája. genetikai közelítés Babits költészetéhez [The aesthetics of a nascent text. A genetic approach to Babits’s poetry]. Budapest: Argumentum.Google Scholar
Kolodkevych, Halyna. 2015. Variatyvnist’ khudozhnioho myslennia Vasylia Stusa [Variability of Vasyl’ Stus’s artistic mindset]. Kyiv: Kyiivs’kyi Mizhnarodnyi Universytet.Google Scholar
Krausová, Nora. 1973. “Textológia a poetica” [Textology and Poetics]. Slovenská Literatúra 20 (3): 132–143.Google Scholar
. 1974. “Literárny text ako proces produkcie” [The Literary Text as a Production Process]. Slovenská Literatúra 21 (2): 178–190.Google Scholar
Leociak, Jacek. 2004. Text in the Face of Destruction: Accounts from the Warsaw Ghetto Reconsidered. Warsaw: ŻIH.Google Scholar
Mináriková, Marianna. 1972. Textologické a štylistické problémy Kukučínovho diela [Textological and stylistic problems of Kukučín’s work]. Bratislava: Vydavateľstvo Slovenskej Akadémie Vied.Google Scholar
Miroshnychenko, Larysa. 2001. Nad rukopysamy Lesi Ukraïnky: Narysy z psykholohiї tvorchosti i tekstolohiї [On Lesia Ukraïnka’s manuscripts: Essays on the psychology of creativity and textology]. Kyiv: Instytut Literatury im T. H. Shevchenka NANU.Google Scholar
. 2003. “Rukopys iak metod vyvchennia psykholohiї tvorchosti [Manuscript as a method for studies on the psychology of creativity].” Materialy p’’iatoho Mizhnarodnoho Konhresu Ukraїnistiv. Literaturoznavstvo, vol. 1, ed. by Oleksa Myshanych, 72–73. Chernivtsi: Ruta.Google Scholar
. 2011. Lesia Ukraïnka. Zhyttia i teksty [Lesia Ukraïnka, Her life and texts]. Kyiv: Smoloskyp.Google Scholar
Mitosek, Zofia. 2004. Teorie badań literackich [The theories of literary scholarship]. Warsaw: PWN.Google Scholar
Mukařovský, Jan. 1968. “Varianten und Stilistik.” Poetica 2 (3): 399–403. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Pigoń, Stanisław. 1967. Formowanie “Dziadów” części II: rekonstrukcja genetyczna [The Forefathers’ Eve, part II – the process of text-making, genetic reconstruction]. Warsaw: PIW.Google Scholar
Portal Shevchenka [The Shevchenko portal]. [URL]
Shallcross, Bożena. 2011. The Holocaust Object in Polish and Polish-Jewish Culture. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.Google Scholar
Sichálek, Jakub. 2018. “Editologická problematika staročeské literatury” [Scholarly Editing in the Context of Old Czech Literature]. In Editologie: Od náčrtu ke knize, ed. by Michal Kosák and Jiří Flaišman, 219–62. Prague: Institute of Czech Literature.Google Scholar
Syvachenko, Mykola. 1974. Literaturoznavchi ta fol’klorystychni rozvidky [Literary and folklore studies]. Kyiv: Naukova dumka.Google Scholar
Szénási, Zoltán. 2018. “Teória és praxis. A szövegkiadás elmélete és gyakorlata Magyarországon – az elmúlt harminc év” [Theory and practice. Theory and practice of text publishing in Hungary – the last thirty years]. Irodalomtörténet 99 (4): 337–359.Google Scholar
Szilágyi, Márton. 2017. Forrásérték és poétika. Kazinczy Ferenc: Fogságom naplója [Source value and poetics. Ferenc Kazinczy: Diary of my captivity]. Budapest: reciti.Google Scholar
Troszyński, Marek. 2017. Alchemia rękopisu. “Samuel Zborowski” Juliusza Słowackiego [The alchemy of the manuscript. “Samuel Zborowski” by Juliusz Słowacki]. Warsaw: IBL PAN.Google Scholar
Vašák, Pavel. 1979. “Dědictví klasiků a textologie” [Heritage of classics and textology]. Tvorba 3: 14.Google Scholar
Veres, András. 2004. “Az Édes Anna kritikai kiadásáról” [On the critical edition of Anna Édes]. Irodalomtörténet 85 (3): 394–401.Google Scholar
Zelenka, Miloš. 1995. “Genetická kritika a literární dějiny” [Genetic criticism and literary history]. Slavia 66 (2): 197–201.Google Scholar
Zubkov, Serhii (ed.). 1968. Pytannia tekstolohii [Issues of textology], vol. 1. Kyiv: Naukova dumka.Google Scholar