In this study I attempt to provide a critical-exegetic reading of Giovanni Boccaccio's Filocolo: critical, because my point of departure is a problem---the insistent, puzzling repetition, on the part of the various characters, of the same story, the story of Florio and Biancifiore; exegetic, because my purpose is to arrive at a global interpretation of the work. / It is my contention that, first, every version of the story appears to be dictated by the purpose of informing the 'ignorant'---namely those unaware of how events truly unfolded---in order to complete a narrative that, from beginning to end "interamente si contenga;" second, that this repetition ensures the unity of the work as a whole. Moreover, the gradual process leading to full information runs parallel, I believe, to the gradual process of Florio's coming of age, from his fallacious "imagining" to his acquisition of "real knowledge." With my interpretation I wish to shed light on one aspect of Boccaccio's poetics, that is, the way he opposes his full, well-founded and consistent account to the "fabulosi parlari degli ignoranti." / On a quite different level, the repetition of the same story can be linked to Boccaccio's penchant for experimenting with the art of storytelling. / I have followed throughout the text of the Filocolo leaving aside, however, Book I, which concerns the parents of the two lovers and is essentially just a premise to the story. The division of my dissertation in four chapters reflects the two distinct phases that, in my opinion, characterize the narration: the 'outward journey' (Chapters I--III) and the 'return journey' (Chapter IV). In Chapter II I deal with the much discussed episode of the Questioni d'amore, that takes place in Naples during a pause in the outward journey. In the Appendix I analyze the phenomenology of death, both actual and 'verbal,' which allows me to explore further the character and personality of Florio and Biancifiore.

This dissertation focuses on Giovanni Boccaccio’s questioni d’amore, a text that, despite its immense richness, has been overlooked within the field of Boccaccio studies. It has been the subject of surprisingly little scholarship, and the sparse work that has been done on them has relegated them to tight and unimaginative spaces. This project, which seeks to fill this critical lacuna, is innovative in three respects: it is the first study to consider all thirteen questioni individually; it offers a new, essential translation of the questioni; and it is the only analysis to date that considers the questioni through a historicizing lens. To this end, I conduct a detailed analysis of the questioni that is contextualized by social history and supplemented with relevant literary intertexts. This study ultimately demonstrates the considerable social, legal, and literary significance of the questioni d’amore and provides new perspectives on Boccaccio’s authorial trajectory and intellectual interests.

No description available.

No description available.

"Akademische preisschrift 1919." / At head of title: Englisches seminar der Universität Rostock. "Literatur": p. [iii]-iv.

No description available.

"Akademische preisschrift 1919." / At head of title: Englisches seminar der Universität Rostock. "Literatur": p. [iii]-iv.

Thesis (Ph. D.)--Princeton University, 1935. / Bibliography: p. 155-158.

Thesis (Ph. D.)--Princeton University, 1935. / Bibliography: p. 155-158.

This thesis has examined the individual accomplishments of Geoffrey Chaucer and Giovanni Boccaccio in terms of their parallel characters and stories. The Chaucerian works used in this study are three stories from The Canterbury Tales: The Knight’s Tale, The Franklin’s Tale, and The Clerk’s Tale. Chaucer’s art of story telling, as exhibited within these stories, has been directly compared to parallel characters and plots taken from the works of Giovanni Boccaccio: The Teseida, The Filocolo, and The Decameron. A direct comparison of Chaucer’s method in creation of character, suspense, and plot to those of Boccaccio has allowed a true estimate of the value of both authors.In addition, it has been possible to examine what Chaucer and Boccaccio found in separate sources but wished to treat differently, what Chaucer saw directly in the works of Boccaccio and wanted to change, and the method of treatment as related to the maturation of the separate writers.