Brittle
发表于 2025-3-26 23:22:17
http://reply.papertrans.cn/23/2268/226712/226712_31.png
Multiple
发表于 2025-3-27 01:21:21
http://reply.papertrans.cn/23/2268/226712/226712_32.png
paradigm
发表于 2025-3-27 06:53:35
http://reply.papertrans.cn/23/2268/226712/226712_33.png
原谅
发表于 2025-3-27 11:30:07
http://reply.papertrans.cn/23/2268/226712/226712_34.png
对待
发表于 2025-3-27 14:59:18
Introduction: Allusion as Revision,ifferent. Having prompted our anticipation of Shakespearean allusion, she refuses to fulfill the expectation she has set up. The poem uses no words from Shakespeare whatsoever. Hence Shakespeare is present in name only; the sole allusion is to an author whose role is quite literally nominal.
其他
发表于 2025-3-27 21:32:44
http://reply.papertrans.cn/23/2268/226712/226712_36.png
蘑菇
发表于 2025-3-27 23:28:47
http://reply.papertrans.cn/23/2268/226712/226712_37.png
商业上
发表于 2025-3-28 04:55:53
http://reply.papertrans.cn/23/2268/226712/226712_38.png
哀求
发表于 2025-3-28 09:40:41
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-59833-3emotional euphoria that resists critical analysis. it is impossible not to feel moved by the exuberance of Robeson’s claim. Yet it is equally hard to avoid wincing at the quality of overstatement in his declaration. Our dilemma involves the copresence of two stories, one celebratory and the other skeptical: both stories must be told.
CRAMP
发表于 2025-3-28 11:00:07
Kurt Lücke,Rolf Rixen,Ursula Schmidt for Shakespeare” (21)—Coetzee records his criticism of Shakespeare’s “declamatory pitch”: “But Chaucer keeps a nice ironic distance from his authorities. And, unlike Shakespeare, he does not get into a froth about things and start ranting” (21).