In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:

Reviews85 HANS FLASCHE & GERD HOFMANN eds., Konkordanz zu Calderón, 5 vols. (Hildesheim & New York: Georg Olms Verlag, 1980- ). Vol. I Autos sacramentales A, B, C, CH. Pp. XVIII + 1,234. DM 198,—. The appearance of the first volume in the long-awaited Hamburg Calderón School's computerized Konkordanz zu Calderón is particularly welcome in this tercentenary year. Vol. I lists Calderón's entire lexicon in the autos from the preposition a (8,833 occurrences) to the noun chuzos (Y). These lemmas are first given where the word occurs last in a given line, then alphabetically—according to the next letter(s)—where the word falls within the line. Each occurrence of a given lemma lists the abbreviation of the respective Calderón auto, the page number of Angel Valbuena Prat's 1952 edition (Obras completas, III), the page column of this edition, the line number in which the lemma occurs, and, finally, the line itself with the lemma optically set off. Four further volumes of similar length will be required to reach the letter Z. It is not clear from Prof. Flasche's trilingual Introduction (German, Spanish, English ) whether the full-length dramas and comedias are to be included in a later Konkordanz. The intrinsic value of this volume is beyond question, and there is lhtle to criticize in its arrangement. My only substantial objection concerns (he use of capital letters throughout. Prof. Flasche concedes that, in consequence , «italicized letters in the Calderón text have therefore been levelled» (Introduction, p. XIII). All lower-case letters have also, however, been levelled , even though it is now technically possible to print-out in both upper- and lower-case letters if this is specified by the computer program. As long ago as 1973, in his essay on «The textual criticism of Calderón's comedias: a survey,» D. W. Cruickshank observed of the Hamburg School's promised concordances: «This is an extremely worthwhile task for which their colleagues in other countries can only be very grateful» (The Comedias of Calderón: A Facsimile Edition /London, 19737, vol. I, p. 28). Cruickshank also made the justified observation: «Admittedly the basis for the concordance is to be the unsatisfactory three-volume Aguilar edition; but if this is put forward as a criticism, the obvious retort is 'What other text is there?'» (ibid.). I share Dr. Cruickshank's common-sense view here, but readers should be warned that La iglesia sitiada (the authenticity of which was seriously questioned some years ago by the late E. M. Wilson) is included, while other suppositious autos of Calderón are not. For a discussion of this latter problem, the calderonista should consult Kurt & Roswitha Reichenberger's recent Bibliographisches Handbuch der Calderón-Forschung (Cassel: Thiele & Schwarz, 1979- ), vol. I, pp. 729-818. Evidently the extrinsic value of the Flasche/Hofmann Konkordanz zu Calderón will depend on the uses to which it is put. Cruickshank has already pointed out the natural advantages of Calderón's huge production in its suitability for statistical analysis; the potential of a concordance as a tool to produce better texts; or its use as a test of authenticity. There is, of course, a concentration of specialized vocabulary in the autos, such as the various com- 86Bulletin of the Comediantes pounds of alegoría/alegórico (174) and alimento^) (129); alma (527); auxilio(s) (95); Cristo (124), and so on. But the overall sample of Calderón's language is doubtless sufficiently wide to permit solid generalizations about his lexicon, constructions, linguistic methods, and other matters. I would here draw especial attention to Calderón's use of the major prepositions, which do not vary greatly in frequency or character within an author's oeuvre according to the context or subject-matter of a given passage. This would provide a valuable test of authorship, for example, similar to the computer-based prepositional analysis used by Edwin B. Brownrigg to vindicate the disputed attribution of the Arte de Furiar of 1652 (written in Portuguese) to P. Antonio Vieira (Diss. NYU, 1981). The drawing up of concordances to Calderón may seem to more subjectively oriented scholars a dry and unrewarding labor. Such...

pdf

Share