多元与对话
|
摘要
被誉为“英语诗歌之父”的杰弗里·乔叟是英国中世纪著名作家。《坎特伯雷故事》是诗人的代表性作品；它集中世纪英语文学之大成,是一部奠定英语文学传统的百科全书式的文学杰作。作品自问世以来的几个世纪里,批评家们从不同角度对作品进行了阐释和解读。本文在前人研究的基础上,运用巴赫金对话诗学理论,结合新批评、叙事学、新历史主义、文化诗学等批评方法,通过对作品的复调性、狂欢化以及互文性等多种对话现象进行分析来探究作品的多元对话性质以及乔叟创作思想与艺术手法上的多元与创新。
本论文由四个章节以及绪论和结语部分组成。绪论概述乔叟和《坎特伯雷故事》在英国文学史上的重要地位、研究价值和《坎特伯雷故事》在国内外的研究成果,论证运用巴赫金诗学理论和现代叙事理论分析研究《坎特伯雷故事》中多元对话特征的可行性,并简述论文的论点及各章节的内容与结构。
第一章主要分析《坎特伯雷故事》的多元化特征。论文从《坎特伯雷故事》中叙事结构的多元化、叙述角度的多元化、叙事体裁的多样化以及主题思想的多元化四个方面进行论证,揭示出作品全方位多层次的多元化性质。诗人以中世纪朝圣框架叙述结构为主体,辅之以中世纪各种重要的叙述形式,使整部作品在叙述结构上呈现多元化特征；在叙述角度上,作品运用诗人乔叟、香客乔叟和香客群体三种叙事人称的转换,从不同叙述角度展开叙述,增强了诗作整体上的多元与对话特征。诗人在《坎特伯雷故事》中使用中世纪几乎所有重要的文学体裁,如浪漫传奇、市井故事、寓意故事、宗教故事等,而每一个文学体裁都有深厚的文学文化传统,因此体裁的多样化体现出作品中不同文化文学传统和思想观念的多元。最后,本章通过分析《坎特伯雷故事》中不同香客所讲故事体现的思想和价值观的矛盾和冲突来论证《坎特伯雷故事》主题思想上的开放和多元性。
第二章致力于论证《坎特伯雷故事》的复调与对话性质。本章从对《坎特伯雷故事》中话语层面的微型对话分析入手,进而通过对香客们所讲故事的不同体裁之间的对话,《坎特伯雷故事》结构上的对话,以及作品思想文化上的对话来探究《坎特伯雷故事》的对话性。巴赫金认为,作品中众多各自独立而又不相融合的声音和意识组成真正意义上的复调。在《坎特伯雷故事》中,作者没有将自己的意识强加给香客-叙述者,没有让他们成为自己话语的传声筒。诗人笔下的香客来自当时不同的社会阶层,代表各自不同的阶级利益,他们拥有独立的主体意识并在叙述中表达不同的价值观念。乔叟将香客们各自讲述的故事结合在朝圣旅途中,通过他们的矛盾和冲突凸显他们之间的对话关系。
第三章着重研究《坎特伯雷故事》的狂欢化性质。作为巴赫金对话理论的重要组成,狂欢化诗学倡导一种对话和平等的精神,一种人文主义精神理念。乔叟身处时代变革的年代,既受到中世纪狂欢化文学传统的影响,又深受意大利早期人文思想的熏陶,而这共同成就了他作品里体现的狂欢与对话精神。《坎特伯雷故事》中狂欢和对话正是通过其狂欢化社会语境、朝圣旅程的狂欢化、广场语言的狂欢化,以及言语风格上的狂欢化等方面充分体现出来。
第四章主要探究《坎特伯雷故事》的互文性对话。本章运用互文性理论和巴赫金关于互文性对话的思想来探究《坎特伯雷故事》中的互文性,主要分析《坎特伯雷故事》与法国、意大利、古罗马以及宗教文学等中世纪欧洲主要的文化、文学传统及其代表流派、作家之间的互文对话,从而在文化、文学传统这一更深、更宽广的层面上研究《坎特伯雷故事》的多元对话。
论文结语指出,《坎特伯雷故事》中的多元对话特征,即作品所蕴含的复调性、狂欢化、互文性等层面上的对话,实际上是中世纪英格兰多元文化社会以及中世纪英格兰文坛多元文学思潮的反映,具有深刻的文化和文学意义。
Geoffrey Chaucer, honored as father of English poetry, is a distinguished medieval English writer. His representative work, The Canterbury Tales is an encyclopedic literary work that epitomizes the achievements of Middle English literature and lays the foundation for English literary tradition in the following centuries. Since its publication, The Canterbury Tales has attracted continuous attention and has been studied by critics and scholars from different perspectives and with different critical methods. On the basis of previous studies, this dissertation mainly applies Bakhtinian dialogical theory about polyphony, carnivalization and intertextuality, together with the New Criticism, Narratology, New Historicism and Cultural poetics, to make a systematical in-depth study of the plurality and dialogue in the text and to reveal the multiplicity and originality of Chaucer's literary thought and artistic features.
Besides the introduction and conclusion, this dissertation falls into four chapters. The introduction starts with a brief presentation of the great importance of Chaucer and The Canterbury Tales in English literary history and a review of earlier critical studies at home and abroad from which this dissertation particularly benefits. It also demonstrates the applicability of Bakhtinian theory and modern narrative strategy to this study of plurality and dialogue in The Canterbury Tales. Finally, it introduces the basic views, the content, and the structure of the dissertation.
Chapter One discusses the plurality in The Canterbury Tales. It focuses on the multi-level narrative structure, the variety of narrative viewpoints, diversity of literary genres and multiple thematic concerns to reveal the essential nature of plurality of the text. The poet uses the pilgrimage as the main narrative structure as well as its narrative frame and many other medieval narrative forms so as to give a multi-level narrative structure to this masterpiece.The text makes a good use of different narrators, including Chaucer the poet, Chaucer the pilgrim, and the pilgrim-narrators, to narrate the pilgrimage and the stories from different perspectives, which significantly increases the plurality and dialogue of the work. Moreover, in the text, the poet employs almost all the major medieval literary genres such as romance, fabliau, allegory and religious narratives, behind each of which stands a long established tradition. Therefore the diversity of genres presents the plurality and interaction of different cultural and literary traditions and thoughts. The last part of this chapter analyzes the thematic plurality and openness through a discussion of the contradictions and conflicts in values among the stories by the pilgrims.
Chapter Two aims to demonstrate the polyphonic dialogue in the text. This chapter starts from analyzing the micro-dialogue in narrative texture to the macro-dialogue between different genres, between narrative structures, and between different cultural and intellectual thoughts. Bakhtin thinks that a polyphonic dialogue takes place between independent, fully valued, and unmerged voices in a work. In this work, the author does not impose his idea upon those pilgrims who come from all walks of life, not treating them as his spokesman, but let them represent their own interests, express their own independent consciousness, and stand for their own values. Besides, Chaucer combines those stories by pilgrims with the interactions of the pilgrims on the pilgrimage. Through the contradictions and conflicts among those pilgrims, the text highlights their dialogic relationship.
Chapter Three focuses on the analysis of carnivalesque dialogue in the text. As an important component of Bakhtinian theory, carnivaleque poetics advocates a kind of equal and dialogic spirit, a kind of humanist thought. Living in a transitional period of profound changes, Chaucer is not only influenced by medieval carnivalesque literary tradition, but also affected by humanist thoughts newly germinated in Italy, which together produce the carnival and dialogic spirit in his work.The carnivalesque dialogue of the text is fully presented in the carnivalized social context, the carnivalesque pilgrimage, the carnivalesque plaza language, and the carnivalesque features of those genres employed by different pilgrims in telling their stories.
Chapter Four mainly explores the intertextual dialogue of the text. The chapter mainly employs intertextual theory and Bakhtin's thinking about intertextuality to analyze the intertextual features in The Canterbury Tales, focusing on the intertextual dialogue between The Canterbury Tales and such major medieval European cultural and literary traditions as French, Italian, classic, and religious, and their representative schools and writers. Thus, the dissertation broadens and deepens its study of the plurality and dialogue of The Canterbury Tales on the level of cultural and literary traditions.
The dissertation concludes that the plurality and dialogue of The Canterbury Tales, that is, the text's polyphony, carnivalization, intertextual dialogue, by nature reflects the cultural plurality in medieval English society and different schools of literary traditions and thinking at that time and, therefore, have special cultural and literary significance.
本论文由四个章节以及绪论和结语部分组成。绪论概述乔叟和《坎特伯雷故事》在英国文学史上的重要地位、研究价值和《坎特伯雷故事》在国内外的研究成果,论证运用巴赫金诗学理论和现代叙事理论分析研究《坎特伯雷故事》中多元对话特征的可行性,并简述论文的论点及各章节的内容与结构。
第一章主要分析《坎特伯雷故事》的多元化特征。论文从《坎特伯雷故事》中叙事结构的多元化、叙述角度的多元化、叙事体裁的多样化以及主题思想的多元化四个方面进行论证,揭示出作品全方位多层次的多元化性质。诗人以中世纪朝圣框架叙述结构为主体,辅之以中世纪各种重要的叙述形式,使整部作品在叙述结构上呈现多元化特征；在叙述角度上,作品运用诗人乔叟、香客乔叟和香客群体三种叙事人称的转换,从不同叙述角度展开叙述,增强了诗作整体上的多元与对话特征。诗人在《坎特伯雷故事》中使用中世纪几乎所有重要的文学体裁,如浪漫传奇、市井故事、寓意故事、宗教故事等,而每一个文学体裁都有深厚的文学文化传统,因此体裁的多样化体现出作品中不同文化文学传统和思想观念的多元。最后,本章通过分析《坎特伯雷故事》中不同香客所讲故事体现的思想和价值观的矛盾和冲突来论证《坎特伯雷故事》主题思想上的开放和多元性。
第二章致力于论证《坎特伯雷故事》的复调与对话性质。本章从对《坎特伯雷故事》中话语层面的微型对话分析入手,进而通过对香客们所讲故事的不同体裁之间的对话,《坎特伯雷故事》结构上的对话,以及作品思想文化上的对话来探究《坎特伯雷故事》的对话性。巴赫金认为,作品中众多各自独立而又不相融合的声音和意识组成真正意义上的复调。在《坎特伯雷故事》中,作者没有将自己的意识强加给香客-叙述者,没有让他们成为自己话语的传声筒。诗人笔下的香客来自当时不同的社会阶层,代表各自不同的阶级利益,他们拥有独立的主体意识并在叙述中表达不同的价值观念。乔叟将香客们各自讲述的故事结合在朝圣旅途中,通过他们的矛盾和冲突凸显他们之间的对话关系。
第三章着重研究《坎特伯雷故事》的狂欢化性质。作为巴赫金对话理论的重要组成,狂欢化诗学倡导一种对话和平等的精神,一种人文主义精神理念。乔叟身处时代变革的年代,既受到中世纪狂欢化文学传统的影响,又深受意大利早期人文思想的熏陶,而这共同成就了他作品里体现的狂欢与对话精神。《坎特伯雷故事》中狂欢和对话正是通过其狂欢化社会语境、朝圣旅程的狂欢化、广场语言的狂欢化,以及言语风格上的狂欢化等方面充分体现出来。
第四章主要探究《坎特伯雷故事》的互文性对话。本章运用互文性理论和巴赫金关于互文性对话的思想来探究《坎特伯雷故事》中的互文性,主要分析《坎特伯雷故事》与法国、意大利、古罗马以及宗教文学等中世纪欧洲主要的文化、文学传统及其代表流派、作家之间的互文对话,从而在文化、文学传统这一更深、更宽广的层面上研究《坎特伯雷故事》的多元对话。
论文结语指出,《坎特伯雷故事》中的多元对话特征,即作品所蕴含的复调性、狂欢化、互文性等层面上的对话,实际上是中世纪英格兰多元文化社会以及中世纪英格兰文坛多元文学思潮的反映,具有深刻的文化和文学意义。
Geoffrey Chaucer, honored as father of English poetry, is a distinguished medieval English writer. His representative work, The Canterbury Tales is an encyclopedic literary work that epitomizes the achievements of Middle English literature and lays the foundation for English literary tradition in the following centuries. Since its publication, The Canterbury Tales has attracted continuous attention and has been studied by critics and scholars from different perspectives and with different critical methods. On the basis of previous studies, this dissertation mainly applies Bakhtinian dialogical theory about polyphony, carnivalization and intertextuality, together with the New Criticism, Narratology, New Historicism and Cultural poetics, to make a systematical in-depth study of the plurality and dialogue in the text and to reveal the multiplicity and originality of Chaucer's literary thought and artistic features.
Besides the introduction and conclusion, this dissertation falls into four chapters. The introduction starts with a brief presentation of the great importance of Chaucer and The Canterbury Tales in English literary history and a review of earlier critical studies at home and abroad from which this dissertation particularly benefits. It also demonstrates the applicability of Bakhtinian theory and modern narrative strategy to this study of plurality and dialogue in The Canterbury Tales. Finally, it introduces the basic views, the content, and the structure of the dissertation.
Chapter One discusses the plurality in The Canterbury Tales. It focuses on the multi-level narrative structure, the variety of narrative viewpoints, diversity of literary genres and multiple thematic concerns to reveal the essential nature of plurality of the text. The poet uses the pilgrimage as the main narrative structure as well as its narrative frame and many other medieval narrative forms so as to give a multi-level narrative structure to this masterpiece.The text makes a good use of different narrators, including Chaucer the poet, Chaucer the pilgrim, and the pilgrim-narrators, to narrate the pilgrimage and the stories from different perspectives, which significantly increases the plurality and dialogue of the work. Moreover, in the text, the poet employs almost all the major medieval literary genres such as romance, fabliau, allegory and religious narratives, behind each of which stands a long established tradition. Therefore the diversity of genres presents the plurality and interaction of different cultural and literary traditions and thoughts. The last part of this chapter analyzes the thematic plurality and openness through a discussion of the contradictions and conflicts in values among the stories by the pilgrims.
Chapter Two aims to demonstrate the polyphonic dialogue in the text. This chapter starts from analyzing the micro-dialogue in narrative texture to the macro-dialogue between different genres, between narrative structures, and between different cultural and intellectual thoughts. Bakhtin thinks that a polyphonic dialogue takes place between independent, fully valued, and unmerged voices in a work. In this work, the author does not impose his idea upon those pilgrims who come from all walks of life, not treating them as his spokesman, but let them represent their own interests, express their own independent consciousness, and stand for their own values. Besides, Chaucer combines those stories by pilgrims with the interactions of the pilgrims on the pilgrimage. Through the contradictions and conflicts among those pilgrims, the text highlights their dialogic relationship.
Chapter Three focuses on the analysis of carnivalesque dialogue in the text. As an important component of Bakhtinian theory, carnivaleque poetics advocates a kind of equal and dialogic spirit, a kind of humanist thought. Living in a transitional period of profound changes, Chaucer is not only influenced by medieval carnivalesque literary tradition, but also affected by humanist thoughts newly germinated in Italy, which together produce the carnival and dialogic spirit in his work.The carnivalesque dialogue of the text is fully presented in the carnivalized social context, the carnivalesque pilgrimage, the carnivalesque plaza language, and the carnivalesque features of those genres employed by different pilgrims in telling their stories.
Chapter Four mainly explores the intertextual dialogue of the text. The chapter mainly employs intertextual theory and Bakhtin's thinking about intertextuality to analyze the intertextual features in The Canterbury Tales, focusing on the intertextual dialogue between The Canterbury Tales and such major medieval European cultural and literary traditions as French, Italian, classic, and religious, and their representative schools and writers. Thus, the dissertation broadens and deepens its study of the plurality and dialogue of The Canterbury Tales on the level of cultural and literary traditions.
The dissertation concludes that the plurality and dialogue of The Canterbury Tales, that is, the text's polyphony, carnivalization, intertextual dialogue, by nature reflects the cultural plurality in medieval English society and different schools of literary traditions and thinking at that time and, therefore, have special cultural and literary significance.
引文
①参见Harold Bloom, ed., Classical Critical Views: Geoffrey Chaucer (New York: Infobase, 2008)5-6.
② 参见John H. Fisher, The Importance of Chaucer (Carbondale and Edwardsville:Southern Illinois UP,1992)148-150.
① 详见Piero Boitani, English Medieval Narrative in the 13th and 14th Centuries, trans. Joan Krakover Hall (Cambridge:Cambridge UP,1982)138-273.
① 参见Corinne Saunders, ed., "The Development of Chaucer Criticism." In Chaucer,5-21, Blackwell Guides to Criticism (Oxford:Blackwell,2001) 10.
② 详见C. S. Lewis, The Allegory of Love: A Study in Medieval Tradition (London: Oxford UP, 1936) 157-198.
① 参见D.W. Robertson, A Preface to Chaucer: Studies in Medieval Perspective (New Jersey: Princeton UP,1962)3.
① 参见Ralph. Baldwin, The Unity of Canterbury Tales (Copenhagen:Rosenkilde and Bagger, 1955).
② 参见Bernard F. Huppe, A Reading of the Canterbury Tales (New York:State U of New York, 1967).
③ 本森(Benson)认为乔叟为每则故事创造出完整的,富有独特的诗学形式,这一点以往从未有人如此做过。具体参见C David. Benson, Chaucer's Drama of Style: Poetic Variety and Contrast in the Canterbury Tales (Chapel Hill:University of North Carolina Press,1986) 20-25.
② 参见Robert M. Jordan, Chaucer's Poetics and the Modern Reader (Berkeley:U of California P, 1987) 20.
① 参见Kathryn L. Lynch, ed., Chaucer s Cultural Geography (New York:London: Routledge, 2002).
② 详见李耀宗：“汉译欧洲中古文学的回顾与展望”,《国外文学》1(2003)27
① 黄呆忻先生诗体翻译的《坎特伯雷故事》最早是在1999年由南京译林出版社出版,后有2001年台北猫头鹰出版社出版,2007年由上海译文出版社出版。
① 参见肖明翰：《乔叟对英国文学的贡献》,载《外国文学评论》,2001年第四期,第85-94页。
①《玫瑰传奇》寓梦幻、传奇、寓意于一体,是法国中世纪一部经典传奇作品,乔叟的诗歌艺术创作手法深受其影响。
②参见肖明翰,《<坎特伯雷故事>的朝圣旅程与基督教传统》,载《外国文学》,2004年第6期,第93-98页。
① 如乔叟在早期创作的《声誉之宫》中就曾使用这种艺术表现手法。
① 参见刘进：《乔叟梦幻诗研究》,北京：社会科学文献出版社,2011年,第11-12页。
① 本文所引《坎特伯雷故事》中的原文均出自杰弗里·乔叟：《坎特伯雷故事》,黄杲炘译,上海：上海译文出版社,2007年。
① 详见Judith Ferster, "Genre in and of the Canterbury Tales", in Saunders's A Concise Companion to Chaucer, (Oxford:Blackwell,2006) 181.
① 详见布斯：《小说修辞学》,华明等译,北京：北京大学出版社,1987年,第80—82页。
① 有关乔叟诗歌中的反讽艺术,详见Earle Birney, Essays on Chaucerian Irony (Toronto: Toronto UP,1985).
① 参见R. M. Wilson, Early Middle English Literature，3rd(London: Methuen,1968) 193.
① 在《百鸟议会》里,乔叟借用鸟类开会择偶的故事来隐射当时英国社会中存在的问题。
② 《圣经》,新约全书,提摩太前书的第6章10节,第334页。
① 在中世纪,基督教神学是占绝对统治地位的思想体系,在意识形态领域里具有无上的权威,对人们的精神文化生活产生巨大的影响,所以被称为“信仰的时代”。详见埃文斯(Evans),G.R：《中世纪的信仰》,茆卫彤译,北京：北京大学出版社,2005年。
① 参见Piero Boitani and Jill Mann, eds., The Cambridge Companion to Chaucer,2nd ed. (Cambridge:Cambridge UP,2003) 17.
② 这一观念源自《圣经》。Dyas将人生喻为去往天堂的朝圣旅程(life conceived as a pilgrimage towards a heavenly destination),她认为,相对于去圣地朝圣,人生的朝圣历程更有意义,具体详见Dee Dyas, Pilgrimage in Medieval English Literature 700-1500 (Cambridge:Cambridge UP,2001)247.
① 参见C.David Benson,"Their Telling Difference:Chaucer the Pilgrim and His Two Contrasting Tales", Chaucer Review 18,(1983-84):71.
① 详见肖明翰：《英语文学传统之形成：中世纪英语文学研究》(上、下),北京：社会科学文献出版社,2009年,第619-620页。
② 参见韦勒克、沃伦著：《文学理论》,刘象愚等译,北京：三联书店,1989年,第72页。
① 详见Harold Bloom, ed., Geoffrey Chaucer s The Canterbury Tales (New York:Infobase,2008) 90.
① 详见肖锋：《巴赫金“微型对话”与“大型对话”》,载《俄罗斯文艺》,2002年第5期,第70-73页。
① 详见肖明翰：《《试论<坎特伯雷故事>的多元与复调》,载《外国文学研究》,2006年第四期,第74-83页。
① 《圣经·新约全书·提摩太前书》6：10。
① 详见乔纳森·卡勒：《结构主义诗学》,盛宁译,北京：中国社会科学出版社,1991年。
① 详见John Hines, The Fabliau in English (London:Longman,1993) 1-23.
① 详见查尔斯·霍默·哈斯金斯：《12世纪文艺复兴》,夏继果译,上海：上海人民出版社,2005年。
① 详见史亚娟的博士论文《文化的狂欢——文化诗学视野下的<坎特伯雷故事>》,首都师范大学,2008年,第71-75页。
① 参见白春仁：《巴赫金——求索对话思维》,载《文学评论》,1998年第五期,第102页。
② 参见史亚娟的博士论文《文化的狂欢：文化诗学视野下的<坎特伯雷故事>》中绪论部分第21-22页。
① 详见巴赫金：《巴赫金全集第六卷》,李兆年、夏忠宪等译,石家庄：河北教育出版社,1998年,第4页。
① 详见巴赫金：《巴赫金全集》(第六卷)拉伯雷研究,李兆林,夏忠宪等译,石家庄：河北教育出版社,1998年,第5-20页
① 特勒将林勃或临界状态(liminality)定义为路途或疆界中的过渡状态或过程,他认为朝圣旅程是一种从常规的社会责任和压力中解脱出来的表征形式。具体详见Victor Turner and Edith Turner, Image and Pilgrimage in Christian Perspective:Anthropological Perspectives (Oxford:Blackwell,1978)7.
① 详见Laura Kendrick, Chaucerian Play: Comedy and Control in The Canterbury Tales (Berkeley: U of California P,1988) 111-121.
① 参见何岳球：((<坎特伯雷故事>中的狂欢化喜剧特色》,载《外国文学研究》,2003年第2期,第55-59页。
①详见约翰·赫伊津哈(荷)：《中世纪的衰落》,杭州：中国美术学院出版社,1997年。
① 详见Derek Brewer,Tradition and Innovation in Chaucer (Maiden: Blackwell,2004) 91.
② 参见马克思、恩格斯：《马克思恩格斯选集》第1卷,北京：人民出版社,1995年,第269页。
① 详见R.A. Shoaf, Dante, Chaucer and the Currency of the Word: Money, Image, Reference in Late Medieval Poetry. (Okla: Pilgrim Books,1983).
② 详见Winthrop Wetherbee, Chaucer and the Poets:An Essay on Troilus and Criseyde (Ithaca: Cornell UP,1984).
③ 参见Karla Taylor, Chaucer Reads the Divine Comedy (Stanford,CA:Stanford UP,1989) 209.
① 详见Richard Neuse, Chaucer's Dante: Allegory and Epic Theatre in The Canterbury Tales (Berkeley and Los Angeles:U of California P,1991) 15-140.
① 薄伽丘的《菲洛斯特拉托》和《苔塞伊达》是两部八行体的长诗,分别从维吉尔的《埃涅阿斯纪》和《特洛伊传奇》中汲取素材,歌颂了现实生活的美好和爱情的欢乐,开创意大利骑士史诗和民间说唱文学的先河。《骑士的故事》早在诗人创作《坎特伯雷故事》之前便已完成,后被诗人编入作品中。
② 中世纪文学将娱乐作为文学创作的理想目标。
③ 详见W.F Bryan and Germaine Dempster, eds., Sources and Analogues of the Chaucer's the Canterbury Tales (Chicago:U of Chicago P.1941)14-20.
① 意大利评论界把薄伽丘的《十日谈》和但丁的《神曲》相媲美,称之为《人曲》。
①参见肖明翰：《<坎特伯雷故事>与<十日谈>——薄伽丘的影响和乔叟的成就》,载《国外文学》,2002年第3期,第77-86页。
① 转引自胡龙彪：《拉丁教父波爱修斯》,北京：商务印书馆,2006年,第6页。
① 参见《圣经,新约全书》,提摩太前书的第6章10节,第334页。
① 参见Piero Boitani, English Medieval Narrative in the 13th and 14th Centuries, trans. Joan Krakover Hall, (Cambridge: Cambridge UP,1982)137.
① 参见肖明翰：《乔叟的探索与<百鸟议会>的成就》,载《四川外语学院学报》,2002年第2期,第3-6页。
Abbot, H. Porter. The Cambridge Introduction to Narrative. Cambridge:Cambridge UP,2002.
Aers, David. Chaucer, Langland, and the Creative Imagination. London:Routledge and Kegan Paul,1980.
Andrew, Malcolm, ed. Critical Essays on Chaucer's Canterbury Tales. Milton Keynes: Open UP,1991.
Astell, A. W. Chaucer and the Universe of Learning. Ithaca: Cornell UP,1996.
Atkins, J. W. H. English Literary Criticism: The Medieval Phase. Gloucester, Mass: Peter Smith,1961.
Auerbach, Erich. Mimesis: The Representation of Reality in Western Literature. Trans. Willard R.Trask. Princeton: Princeton UP,1968.
Bakhtin, Mikahil. Rabelais and His World. Trans. Helene Iswolsky. Bloomington: Indiana UP,1984.
--. The Dialogical Imagination: Four Essays. Trans. Caryl Emerson and Michael Holquist. Austin: Texas UP,1981.
---. Problems of Dostoevsky's Poetics. Trans. Caryl. Emerson. Minneapolis:U of Minnesota P,1984.
--- and P.M.Medvedev, The Formal Method in Literary Scholarship. Albert J.Wehrle, ed. Cambridge:Harvard UP,1985.
Bal, Mieke. Narratologie. Paris:Klincksieck,1977.
Baldwin, Ralph. The Unity of Canterbury Tales. Copenhagen:Rosenkilde and Bagger, 1955.
Barron, W. R. J, English Medieval Romance. London and New York:Longman,1987.
Baum, Paul F. Chaucer's Verse. Durham:Duke UP,1961.
Benson, C.David. Chaucer s Drama of Style: Poetic Variety and Contrast in the Canterbury Tales. Chapel Hill:U of North Carolina P,1986.
---. "Their Telling Difference:Chaucer the Pilgrim and His Two Contrasting Tales". Chaucer Review 18 (1983-84):71.
---and E.Robertson. Chaucer s Religious Tales. Cambridge:Harvard UP,1990.
Benson, L.D, ed. The Riverside Chaucer. Oxford: Oxford UP,1988.
Benson, Robert G. and Susan J.Ridyard eds. New Readings of Chaucer's Poetry. Suffolk: Edmundsbury,2003.
Besserman, Lawrence. Chaucer's Biblical Poetics. Norman:U of Oklahoma P,1998.
Birney, Earle. Essays on Chaucerian Irony. Toronto:Toronto UP,1985.
Bisson, Lillian M. Chaucer and the Late Medieval World. New York:St.Martin's, 1998.
Bishop, Ian. The Narrative Art of the Canterbury Tales. London:Guensey,1987.
Blamires, Alcuin. Chaucer, Ethics and Gender. Oxford:Oxford UP,2006.
Blake, William. "Prospectus of the Engraving of Chaucer's Canterbury Pilgrims, in Poetry and Prose of William Blake, ed. Geoffrey Keynes. London,1943.
Blake, Norman. The English Language in Medieval Literature. London: J.M.Den&Sons,1977.
Bloom, Harold, ed. Geoffrey Chaucer's The Canterbury Tales. New York:Infobase, 2008.
---, ed. Classical Critical Views: Geoffrey Chaucer. New York:Infobase,2008.
---. The Western Canon. New York: Harcourt Brace,1994.
Boitani, Piero. English Medieval Narrative in the 13th and 14th Centuries. Trans. Joan Krakover Hall, Cambridge: Cambridge UP,1982.
--- and Jill Mann, eds. The Cambridge Companion to Chaucer.2nd Ed. Cambridge: Cambridge UP,2003.
---, ed.Chaucer and the Italian Trecento. London:Cambridge UP,1985.
Boethius. The Consolation of Philosophy. Trans. V.E.Watts. New York:Penguin, 1969.
Booth, Wayne C. The Rhetoric of Fiction. Chicago:U of Chicago P,1961.
Bracton, On the Laws and Customs of England, eds and Trans. G.E. Woodbine and S.E.Thorne, Vo1.2. Cambridge:Mass,1968.
Brewer, Derek. Tradition and Innovation in Chaucer. Malden:Blackwell,2004.
---. Chaucer: The Poet as Storyteller. London:Macmillan,1984.
---. An Introduction to Chaucer. London and New York:Longman,1984.
---. English Gothic Literature. London: Macmilian,1983.
---, ed. Geoffrey Chaucer: The Critical Heritage,1385-1837. Vo1.1. London: Routledge,1978.
---, Chaucer (1953),3rd ed. London:Longmans,1973.
---, ed. Medieval Comic Tales.2nd ed. Cambridge:Brewer,1996.
Brown, Peter, ed. A Companion to Medieval English Literature and Culture 1350-1500. Oxford:Blackwell,2007.
---, ed. A Companion to Chaucer. Oxford:Blackwell,2000.
Brown, Peter and Andrew Butcher. The Age of Saturn:Literature and History in the Canterbury Tales. Cambridge, MA:Basil Blackwell,1991.
Bryan, W. F, and Germaine Dempster, eds, Sources and Analogues of the Chaucer's the Canterbury Tales. Chicago:U of Chicago P.1941.
Burger, Glenn. Chaucer s Queer Nation. Minneapolis:U of Minnesota P,2003.
Burrow, J.A. "Irony in the Merchant's Tale". Anglia 75, (1957):199-208
---. Essays on Medieval Literature. Oxford:Oxford UP,1984.
---.Ricardian Poetry: Chaucer, Gower, Langland and the Gawain Poet. New Haven: Yale UP,1971.
---.Geoffrey Chaucer: A Critical Anthology. Harmondsworth:Penguin,1969.
Cannon, Christopher. The Making of Chaucer's English. Cambridge:Cambridge UP, 1998.
Chatman, Seymour. Story and Discourse: Narrative Structure in Fiction and Film. Ithaca: Cornell UP,1978.
Chaucer, Geoffrey. The Canterbury Tales. Trans. Nevill Coghill,Harmondsworth: Penguin,1951.
--. The Canterbury Tales (Modern English Version).Trans. David Wright, Oxford: Oxford UP,1985.
Clawson, W. H. "The Framework of the Canterbury Tales". University of Toronto Quarterly,20 (1951):147-150.
Cooper, Helen. The Structure of The Canterbury Tales. Athens:U of Georgia P,1984.
---. Oxford Guides to Chaucer: The Canterbury Tales. New York:Oxford UP,1989.
Coulton, G.C. Chaucer and His England. London:Methuen,1998.
Cox, C. Gender and Language in Chaucer. Gainesville:U of Florida P,1997.
Craik, T.W. The Comic Tales of Chaucer. London: Methuen,1964.
Crane, Susan. Gender and Romance in Chaucer's Canterbury Tales. Princeton: Princeton UP,1994.
Crow. Martin M. and Clair C.Olson, eds. Chaucer Life-Records. Oxford:Oxford UP, 1966.
Dante Alighieri, Dantis Alegherii Epistolae:The Letters of Dante.2nd ed. Trans. Paget Jackson Toynbee. Oxford: Clarendon,1966.
David, Alfred. The Strumpet Muse:Art and Morals in Chaucer s Poetry. Bloomington and London:Indiana UP,1976.
Dempster, Germaine. Dramatic Irony in Chaucer. New York:Humanities,1959.
Dinshaw, Carolyn. Chaucer's Sexual Poetics. Madison:U of Wisconsin P,1989.
Donaldson, E.T. Speaking of Chaucer. London:Athlone,1970.
Drabble, Margaret, ed. The Oxford Companion to English Literature. Beijing:Foreign Language Teaching and Research,2005.
Dyas, Dee. Pilgrimage in Medieval English Literature 700-1500. Cambridge: Cambridge UP,2001
Eagleton, Terry. Literary Theory: An Introduction. Oxford: Worcester,1983.
Eco, Umberto. The Role of the Reader:Explorations in the Semiotics of Texts. Bloomington:Indiana UP,1979.
Edwards, Philip. Pilgrimage and Literary Tradition. Cambridge:Cambridge UP, 2005.
Edwards, Robert R. Chaucer and Boccaccio:Antiquity and Modernity. New York: Palgrave,2002.
Eliot, T S. "Tradition and the Individual Talent." 20th Century Literary Criticism:A Reader, ed. David Lodge. London:Longman,1972.
Ellis, Roger. Patterns of Religious Narrative in the Canterbury Tales. London:Croom Helm,1986.
Ellis, Steve, ed. Chaucer: An Oxford Guide. New York:Oxford UP,2005.
Fein, Susanna Greer, David Raybin and Peter C. Braeger. Rebels and Rivals:The Contestive Spirit in the Canterbury Tales. Kalamazoo:Western Michigan,1991.
Ferster, Judith. Chaucer on Interpretation, Cambridge:Cambridge UP,1985.
Fish, Stanley. Is there a text in this class? The Authority of Interpretive Communities. Cambridge:Harvard UP,1980.
Fisher, John H. The Importance of Chaucer. Carbondale and Edwardsville:Southern Illinois UP,1992.
Ford, Boris, ed. The Age of Chaucer, Volume 1. Harmondsworth:Penguin,1954.
Forster, E. M. Aspects of the Novel. London:Hodder&Stoughton,1993.
Frye, Northrop. Anatomy of Criticism, Third Essay, and The Secular Scripture:A Study of the Structure of Romance. Princeton:Princeton UP,1957.
Fyler, John M. Chaucer and Ovid. New Haven and London: Yale UP,1979.
Ganim, John M. Chaucerian Theatricality. Princeton:Princeton UP,1990.
Gardner, J. The Life and Times of Chaucer. London:Jonathan Cape,1977.
Gaylord, Alan T. Essays on the Art of Chaucer's Verse. New York: Routledge,2001.
Genette, Gerard. Narrative Discourse. Trans. Jane E. Lewin. Ithaca: Cornell UP,1980.
Gibson, M.T, ed. Boethius, His Life, Thought and Influence. Oxford: Basil Blackwell,1981.
Gittes, Katharine S. Framing The Canterbury Tales: Chaucer and the Medieval Frame Narrative Tradition. New York:Greeenwood Press,1991.
Gray, Douglas, ed. The Oxford Companion to Chaucer. Oxford:Oxford UP,2004.
Green, Richard Firth. A Crisis of Truth: Literature and Law in Ricardian England. Philadelphia: U of Pennsylvania P,1999.
Greenblatt, Stephen, ed. The Norton Anthology of English Literatrure (8th Edition) New York:Norton,2006.
---. Renaissance Self-Fashioning: From More to Shakespeare.Chicago: U of Chicago P,1980.
Greene, Joseph E. Geoffrey Chaucer's Canterbury Tales. Simon & Schuster Interpress, 1997.
Guerin, Wilfred L. A Handbook of Critical Approaches to Literature. Beijing:Foreign Language and Research,2004.
Hallissy, Margaret. A Companion to Chaucer's Canterbury Tales. London: Greenwood,1995.
Hanawalt, Barbara A, ed. Chaucer's England: Literature and Historical Context. Minneapolis:U of Minnesota P,1992.
Hansen, Elaine Tuttle. Chaucer and the Fictions of Gender. Berkeley:U of California P,1992.
Hardie, Philip. The Cambridge Companion to Ovid. Shanghai:Shanghai Foreign Language Education,2004.
Heer, Friedrich. The Medieval World. New York:Penguin Books Ltd,1961.
Hefferman, Carol Falvo. The Orient in Chaucer and Medieval Romance. Cambridge: Brewer,2003.
Herman, David et. Al, eds. Routledge Encyclopedia of Narrative Theory. London: Routledge,2005.
Hill, John M. Chaucerian Belief: The Poetics of Reverence and Delight. New Haven: Yale UP,1991.
Hines, John. The Fabliau in English. London: Longman,1993.
Hirsh, John C. Chaucer and the Canterbury Tales: A Short Introduction. London: Blackwell,2003.
Hoffman, Arthur W.'Chaucer's Prologue to Pilgrimage:The Two Voices', English Literary History 21 (1954):1-16.
Howard, Donald R. The Idea of The Canterbury Tales. Los Angeles: California UP, 1976.
---. Chaucer: His Life, His Works, His World. New York: E. P. Dutton,1987.
Howes, L. Chaucer's Gardens and the Language of Convention. Gainesville:U of Florida P,1997.
Huppe, Bernard F. A Reading of the Canterbury Tales. New York:State U of New YorkP,1967.
Iser, Wolfgang. The Implied Reader, Patterns of Communication in Prose Fiction from Bunyan to Beckett. Baltimore and London:The Johns Hopkins UP,1978.
Jeffrey, David Lyle, ed. Chaucer and Biblical Tradition. Ottawa: U of Ottawa P,1984.
Jones, Terry. Chaucer's Knight: The Portrait of a Medieval Mercenary. London: Methuen,1982.
Jordan, Robert M. Chaucer & the Shape of Creation. Cambridge:Harvard UP,1967.
---. Chaucer's Poetics and the Modern Reader. Berkeley:U of California P,1987
Josipovici,G..D. Fiction and Game in The Canterbury Tales,189-190, Critical Quarterly 7,1965.
Jost, Jean E, ed. Chaucer's Humor: Critical Essays. Garland Studies in Humor 5. New York:Garland,1994.
Kean, P. M. Chaucer and the Making of English Poetry. London:Routledge,1972.
Keen, Maurice. Chivalry. New Haven:Yale UP,1984.
Kendrick, Laura. Chaucerian Play: Comedy and Control in The Canterbury Tales. Berkeley:U of California P,1988.
Ker, W.P. The Dark Ages. New York:New American Library,1923.
Kittredge, George L. Chaucer and His Poetry. Cambridge:Harvard UP,1970.
Knapp, Peggy Ann. Chaucer and the Social Contest. Routledge:Chapman,1990.
Koff, Leonard Michael. Chaucer and the Art of Storytelling. Berkeley:U of California P,1988.
Kolve, V.A. Chaucer and the Imagery of Narrative. London:Edward Arnold,1984.
Koonce, B.G. Chaucer and the Tradition of Fame. Princeton:Princeton UP,1966.
Kratzmann, Gregory, and James Simpton, eds. Medieval English Religious and Ethical Literature. Cambridge:Brewer,1968.
Kristeva, Julia.Semiotike: Recherches pour une semanalyse. Paris:Seuil,1969.
---. La Revolution du language poetique. Paris:Seuil,1974.
---. Word, Dialogue and the Novel, The Kristeva Reader, ed. Toril Moi. New York: Columbia UP,1986.
Kruger, Steven F. Dreaming in the Middle Ages. Cambridge:Cambridge UP,1992.
Lambdin, Laura C.and Robert T. Lambdin, eds. Chaucer's Pilgrims: A Historical Guide to the Pilgrims in The Canterbury Tales. London: Greenwood,1996.
Laskaya, Anna. Chaucer's Approach to Gender in the Canterbury Tales. Chaucer Studies 23. Cambridge:Brewer,1995.
Lawrence, William Witherle. Chaucer and the Canterbury Tales. New York: Biblo and Tannen,1969.
Lawton, David. "Chaucer's Narrators". Chaucer Studies,12. Cambridge:Brewer, 1985.
Leech, Geoffrey and Michael Short. Style in Fiction. London:Longman,1981.
Leff, G. Medieval Thought: St. Augustine to Ockham. Harmondsworth:Penguin,1958.
Lerer, Seith.The Yale Companion to Chaucer. New York: Yale UP,2006.
Lewis, C. S. The Allegory of Love: A Study in Medieval Tradition. London:Oxford UP, 1936.
Leyerle, John and Anne Quick, eds. Chaucer: A Bibliographical Introduction. Toronto: U of Toronto P,1986.
Lindahl, Carl. Earnest Games: Folkloric Patterns in the Canterbury Tales. Bloomington:Indiana UP,1987.
Lounsbury, Thomas R. Studies in Chaucer,3 vols. New York:Russell,1962.
Lowes, John Livingston. Geoffrey Chaucer. Oxford:Clarendon,1934.
Lubbock, Percy. The Craft of Fiction. New York: Viking,1957.
Lumiansky, R.M. Of Sondry Folk: The Dramatic Principle in the Canterbury Tales. U of Texas P,1980.
Lynch, Kathryn L, ed. Chaucer s Cultural Geography. New York:Routledge,2002.
---. Chaucer's Philosophical Visions. Chaucer Studies 26. Cambridge:Brewer,2000.
Manly, John Matthews, Some New Light on Chaucer. New York:Henry Holt,1926.
Mann, Jill. Chaucer and Medieval Estates Satire: The Literature of Social Classes and the General Prologue to the Canterbury Tales. Cambridge:Cambridge UP,1973.
Marenbon, John. Boethius, Oxford:Oxford UP,2003.
Marshall, Leicester H.Jr, "The Art of Impersonation:A General Prologue to the CT, PMLA 95(1980) " The Speaker of the Canterbury Tales:222
Martin, Priscilla. Chaucer's Women: Nuns, Wives and Amazons. Iowa City:U of Iowa P,1990.
McClellan, William. "Bakhtin's Theory of Dialogic Discourse, Medieval Rhetorial Theory and the Multi-Voiced Structure of the Clerk's Tale". Exemplaria 1.2, 1989.
Mehl, Dieter. Geoffrey Chaucer: An Introduction to his Narrative Poetry. Cambridge: Cambridge UP,1986.
---. English Literature in the Age of Chaucer. London:Pearson,2001.
Menocal, Maria Rosa. Arabic Role in Medieval Literary History: A Forgotten Heritage. Philadelphia: U of Pennsylvania P,1987.
Metlitzki, Dorothee. The Matter of Araby in Medieval England. New Haven:Yale UP, 1977.
Miller, Mark. Philosophical Chaucer: Love, Sex and Agency in the Canterbury Tales. Cambridge:Cambridge UP,2004.
Miller, R. P, ed. Chaucer, Sources and Background. Oxford:Oxford UP,1977.
Minnis, A.J.Chaucer and Pagan Antiquity: Cambridge:Brewer,1982.
Morgan, Kenneth O. The Oxford History of Britain. Beijing:Foreign Language Teaching and Research,2007.
Muscatine, Charles. Medieval Literature, Style and Culture. Columbia: U of South Carolina P,1999.
---. Chaucer and the French Tradition: A Study in Style and Meaning. Berkeley and Los Angeles:U of California P,1957.
---. The Old French Fabliau. New Haven and London:Yale UP,1986.
Neuse, Richard. Chaucer s Dante: Allegory and Epic Theatre in The Canterbury Tales. Berkeley and Los Angeles:U of California P,1991.
North, J.D. Chaucer's Universe. Oxford:Clarendon,1988.
O'Donoglue, Bernard, ed. The Courtly Tradition. Manchester: Manchester UP,1982.
Olson, Paul. The Canterbury Tales and the Good Society. Princeton:Princeton UP, 1986.
Owen, Charles A., Jr. Pilgrimage and Storytelling in the Canterbury Tales: The Dialectic of Ernest and Game. Norman: U of Oklahoma P,1977.
Pascal, Roy. The Dual Voice. Manchester: Manchester UP,1977.
Patterson, Lee. Temporal Circumstances: Form and History in The Canterbury Tales, New York: Macmillan,2006.
---.Chaucer and the Subject of History. London:Routledge,1991.
Pearsall, Derek. A Critical Biography: The life of Geoffrey Chaucer. Oxford: Blackwell,1992.
---.The Canterbury Tales. London:George Allen,1985.
Phillips, Helen. An Introduction to the Canterbury Tales. New York: Martin's,2000.
Phillips, Helen and Nick Havely, eds. Chaucer's Dream Poetry. Burnt Mill:Longman, 1994.
Pickering, Francis P. Literature and Art in the Middle Ages. Coral Gables:U of Miami P,1970.
Prior, Sandra Pierson, "Parodying Typology and the Mystery Plays in the Miller's Tale." Journal of Medieval and Renaissance Studies 16(1986):57.
Quilligan, Maureen. The Language of Allegory: Defining the Genre. Ithaca: Cornell UP,1979.
Quinn, William A. Chaucer s Dream Visions and Shorter Poems. New York:Garland, 1999.
Rigby, S.H. Chaucer in Context: Society, Allegory and Gender. Manchester: Manchester UP,1996.
Rigg, A.G. A History of Anglo-Latin Literature,1066-1422. Cambridge:Cambridge UP,1992.
Robertson, D.W, Jr. A Preface to Chaucer: Studies in Medieval Perspective. New Jersey:Princeton UP,1962.
Robinson, F. N, ed. The Works of Geoffrey Chaucer,2nd Ed. Boston: Houghton Mifflin, 1957.
Robinson, Ian. Chaucer and the English Tradtion. Cambridge:Cambridge UP,1972.
Root, Robert Kilburn. The Poetry of Chaucer:A Guide to Its Study and Appreciation. Cambridge:Riberrsine,1922.
Rubin, Miri. Gentile Tales: The Narrative Assault on Late Medieval Jews. New Haven: Yale UP,1999.
Rudd, Gillian. The Complete Critical Guide to Geoffrey Chaucer, London: Routledge, 2001.
Rudd, N. The Classical Tradition in Operation. Toronto:U of Toronto P,1994.
Ruth Morse and Barry Windeatt, eds. Chaucer Traditions: Studies in Honor of Derek Brewer, Cambridge:Cambridge UP,1990.
Saunders, Corinne, ed. A Companion to Romance from Classical to Contemporary. Malden:Blackwell,2004.
--, ed. A Concise Companion to Chaucer. Oxford: Blackwell,2006.
---. Chaucer. Oxford:Blackwell,2001.
---. "The Development of Chaucer Criticism." In Corinne Saunders, ed. Chaucer,5-22, Blackwell Guides to Criticism. Oxford:Blackwell,2001.
Scanlon, Larry, ed. The Cambridge Companion to Medieval English Literature 1100-1500. Cambridge: Cambridge UP,2009.
Schless, Howard. Chaucer and Dante:A Revaluation. Norman, Okla: Pilgrim,1984.
Schlauch, M. English Medieval Literature and Its Social Foundations. London: Oxford UP,1956.
Shoaf, R.A. Dante, Chaucer and the Currency of the Word: Money, Image, Reference in Late Medieval Poetry. Norman, Okla: Pilgrim,1983.
Skeat, W.W, ed. The Works of Geoffrey Chaucer.7 vols. Oxford:Clarendon P, 1894-1897.
---. ed. Chaucerian and Other Pieces: Being a Supplement to the Complete Works of Geoffrey Chaucer. Oxford:Clarendon P,1897.
Skute, Larry. Virtue of Necessity: Inconclusiveness and Narrative Form in Chaucer's Poetry. Columbus:Ohio State UP,1984.
Southern, R.W. The Making of the Middle Ages. London:Hutchinson,1953.
Spearing, A.C. Medieval to Renaissance in English Poetry. Cambridge: Cambridge UP,1985.
Speirs, John. Chaucer the Maker. London: Faber,1951.
Spurgeon, C.F.E, ed. Five Hundred Years of Chaucer Criticism and Allusion, 1357-1900, vol I. New York:Russell,1960.
Stanzel, F.K. A Theory of Narrative. Cambridge:Cambridge UP,1984.
Stillinger, Thomas C, ed. Critical Essays on Geoffrey Chaucer. New York: G.K.Hall&Co.1998.
Strohm, Paul. Social Chaucer. Harvard:Harvard UP,1994.
Sumption, Jonathan. Pilgrimage:An Image of Medieval Religion. London:Faber, 1975.
Sypher, Wylie. Four Stages of Renaissance Style: Transformations in Art and Literature 1400-1700. Garden City, NY: Doubleday,1955.
Taylor, Karla. Chaucer Reads the Divine Comedy. Stanford, CA:Stanford UP,1989.
Turner, Victor. The Ritual Process: Structure and Anti-Structure. London: Routledge, 1969.
--- and Edith Turner. Image and Pilgrimage in Christian Perspective: Anthropological Perspectives. Oxford:Blackwell,1978.
Wagenknecht, Edward. Chaucer: Modern Essays in Criticism. Oxford: Oxford UP, 1959.
Wallace, David, ed. The Cambridge History of Medieval English Literature. Cambridge:Cambridge UP,1999.
---. Chaucerian Polity: Absolutist Lineages and Associational Forms in England and Italy. Standford:Standford UP,1997.
Wetherbee, Winthrop. Chaucer and the Poets:An Essay on Troilus and Criseyde. Ithaca: Cornell UP,1984.
Whittock, Trevor. A Reading of the Canterbury Tales. Cambridge:Cambridge UP, 1968.
Williams, David. The Canterbury Tales: A Literary Pilgrimage. Boston: GK.Hall, 1987.
Wilson, R. M. Early Middle English Literature,3rd. London: Methuen,1968.
Wimsatt, J.I. Chaucer and the French Love Poets. Chapel Hill:U of North Carolina P, 1968.
Windeatt, B, ed. Chaucer's Dream Poetry: Sources and Analogues. Cambridge and Totowa New Jersey: Brewer, Rowman and Littlefield,1982.
Woodring, Carl and James Shapiro. The Columbia History of British Poetry. Beijing: Foreign Language Teaching and Research,2005.
埃文斯(Evans), G. R:《中世纪的信仰》,茆卫彤译,北京：北京大学出版社,2005。
爱教,艾哈迈德(埃)：《阿拉伯一伊斯兰文化史》(第二册),纳忠等译,北京：商务印书馆,1990。
艾略特,T.S：《艾略特文学论文集》,李赋宁译,南昌：百花洲文艺出版社,1994。
奥维德：《变形记》,杨周翰译,北京：人民文学出版社,1984。
奥尔巴赫,埃里希(德)：《摹仿论——西方文学中所描绘的现实》,吴麟绶等译,天津：百花文艺出版社,2002。
巴尔,米克著：《叙述学：叙事理论导论》,谭君强译,北京：中国社会科学出版社,1995。
巴赫金,米哈伊尔：《巴赫金全集》(第五卷)诗学与访谈,白春仁,顾亚铃译,石家庄：河北教育出版社,1998。
---：《巴赫金全集》(第六卷)拉伯雷研究,李兆林,夏忠宪等译,石家庄：河北教育出版社,1998。
---：《巴赫金全集》(第四卷)文本对话人文,白春仁等译,石家庄：河北教育出版社,1998。
---：《巴赫金文论选》,北京：中国社会科学出版社,1996。
---：《陀思妥耶夫斯基诗学问题》,白春仁、顾亚铃译,北京：三联书店,1988。
---：《陀思妥耶夫斯基诗学问题》,刘虎译,中央编译出版社,2012。
白春仁.《巴赫金——求索对话思维》,《文学评论》,1998(5)：101-108
伯罗(Burrow), J. A:《中世纪作家与作品——中古英语文学及背景》,沈弘译,北京：北京大学出版社,2007。
本内特,朱迪斯·M、C·沃伦·霍利斯特：《欧洲中世纪史》,杨宁、李韵译, 上海：上海社会科学出版社,2007。
薄伽丘：《十日谈》,王永年译,北京：华夏出版社,2008。
波爱修斯(古罗马)：《哲学的慰藉》,代国强译,南昌：江西人民出版社,2007。
布朗,科林：《基督教与西方思想》(卷一),查常平译,北京：北京大学出版社,2005。
布斯,韦恩：《小说修辞学》,华明、胡晓苏、周宪等译,北京：北京大学出版社,1987。
布洛克,阿伦(英)：《西方人文主义传统》,董乐山译,北京：生活·读书·新知三联书店,1997。
布鲁姆,哈罗德：江宁康译,《西方正典》,南京：译林出版社,2005。
---：《影响的焦虑》,南京：江苏教育出版社,2005。
---：《误读之图》,纽约：牛津大学出版社,1975。
布克哈特,雅各布：《意大利文艺复兴时期的文化》,北京：商务印书馆,1979。
曹航：《乔叟<坎特伯雷故事)之独创性》,上海外国语大学博士论文,2008年5月。
陈才宇：《古英语与中古英语文学通论》,北京：商务印书馆,2007。
陈乐民：《欧洲文明十五讲》,北京：北京大学出版社,2004。
陈永国：《互文性》,赵一凡《西方文论关键词》217-21。
陈彦平：《论(坎特伯雷故事>的多样整合性》,吉林大学硕士论文,2008年3月。
程锡麟：《互文性理论述评》,《外国文学》1(1996)：72-78。
程正民：《巴赫金的文化诗学》,北京：北京师范大学出版社,2001年。
蒂费纳,萨莫瓦约(法)：《互文性研究》,邵炜译,天津：天津人民出版社,2003。
丁建宁：《超越的可能：作为知识分子的乔叟》,华东师范大学博士论文,2009年5月。
董希文著：《文学文本理论研究》,北京：社会科学文献出版社,2006。
董学文编：《西方文学理论史》,北京：北京大学出版社,2005。
法胡里,汉纳(黎)：《阿拉伯文学史》,邓溥浩译,北京：人民文学出版社,1990。
费尔巴哈：《基督教的本质》,朱震华译,北京：商务印书馆,1997。
费伦：《作为修辞的叙事》,陈永国译,北京：北京大学出版社,2002。
格茨,汉斯-维尔纳(德)：《欧洲中世纪生活》,王亚平译,北京：东方出版社,2002。
哈斯金斯,查尔斯·霍默：《12世纪文艺复兴》,夏继果译,上海：上海人民出版社,2005。
何岳球：《<坎特伯雷故事>中的狂欢化喜剧特色》,《外国文学研究》2(2003)：55-59
赫尔曼,戴卫：《新叙事学》,马海良译,北京：北京大学出版社,2002。
赫伊津哈,约翰(荷)：《中世纪的衰落》,杭州：中国美术学院出版社,1997。
胡金望等编：《文化诗学的理论与实践研究》,北京：中国社会科学出版社,2004。
胡亚敏：《叙事学》,武汉：华中师大出版社,1994。
黑格尔：《美学：第二卷》,北京：商务印书馆,1979。
蒋洪新：《英美诗歌选读》,长沙：湖南师大出版社,2004。
姜岳斌：《伦理的诗学——但丁诗学思想研究》,杭州：浙江大学出版社,2007。
金元浦：《文学解释学》,长春：东北师范大学出版社,1997。
凯特琳娜·克拉克；迈克尔·霍奎斯特(美)：《米哈伊尔·巴赫金》,语冰译,北京：人民大学出版社,1992。
莱恩,迈克尔(美)著：《文学作品的多重解读》,赵炎秋译,北京：北京大学出版社,2006。
兰格伦,威廉：《农夫皮尔斯》,沈弘译,北京：中国对外翻译出版公司,1999。
李赋宁编：《欧洲文学史》(第一卷),北京：商务印书馆,1999。
---：《蜜与蜡：西方文学阅读心得》,北京：北京大学出版社,1995。
李赋宁、何其莘编：《英国中古时期文学史》,北京：外语教学与研究出版社,2006。
李玉平：《多元文化时代的文学经典理论》,天津：南开大学出版社,2010。
李耀宗：“汉译欧洲中古文学的回顾与展望”,《国外文学》1(2003)23-33。
李维屏：《英国为小说人物史》,上海：上海外语教育出版社,2008。
利维斯,F.R.(英)：《伟大的传统》,袁伟译,北京：生活·读书·新知三联书店,2002。
梁工：《圣经叙事艺术研究》,北京：商务印书馆,2006。
---：《西方圣经批评引论》,北京：商务印书馆,2006。
梁工编：《基督教文学》,北京：宗教文化出版社,2001。
刘易斯,C.S：《中世纪和文艺复兴时期的文学研究》,胡虹译,上海：华东师范大学出版社,2010。
刘乃银：《巴赫金的理论与<坎特伯雷故事>》,上海：华东师范大学出版社,1999。
刘建军：《基督教文化与西方文学传统》,北京：北京大学出版社,2005。
---：《欧洲中世纪文学论稿》,北京：中华书局,2010。
刘进：《乔叟梦幻诗研究》,北京：社会科学文献出版社,2011。
---：《权威与经验之对话——乔叟梦幻诗研究》,湖南师范大学博士论文,2007年4月。
刘意青、罗经国编：《欧洲文学史第一卷》,北京：商务印书馆,1999。
刘康：《对话的喧声——巴赫金的文化转型理论》,北京：北京大学出版社,2011。
刘洋风：《矛盾中的萌芽》,南京师范大学硕士论文,2005年6月。
洛奇,戴维：《二十世纪文学评论》,上海：上海译文出版社,1987。
陆扬：《西方美学通史·中世纪文艺复兴美学》,上海：上海文艺出版社,1999。
---：《欧洲中世纪诗学》,上海：上海社会科学院出版社,2000。
---：《文艺复兴诗学》,上海：上海交通大学出版社,2012。
罗钢：《叙事学导论》,昆明：云南人民出版社,1994。
罗素：《西方哲学史(上、下)》,马元德译,北京：商务印书馆,1976。
凌建侯：《巴赫金哲学思想与文本分析法》,北京：北京大学出版社,2007。
马丁：《当代叙事学》,伍晓明译,北京：北京大学出版社,2005。
马新国主编：《西方文论史》,北京：高等教育出版社,1994。
马克思、恩格斯：《马克思恩格斯选集》第1卷,北京：人民出版社,1995。
梅兰：《巴赫金哲学美学和文学思想研究》,武汉：华中科技大学出版社,2005。
倪世光：《西欧中世纪骑士的生活》,保定：河北大学出版社,2004。
宁一中：《狂欢化与康拉德的小说世界》,长沙：湖南师范大学出版社,1999。
聂珍钊、杜娟等著： 《英国文学的伦理学批评》,上海：华中师范大学出版社,2007。
诺斯罗普·弗莱：《批评的剖析》,陈慧等译,天津：百花文艺出版社,1998。
乔叟,杰弗里：《坎特伯雷故事》,黄杲忻译,上海：上海译文出版社,2007。
---：《乔叟文集》(上、下),方重译,上海：上海译文出版社,1979。
---：《特洛勒斯与克丽西德》,吴芬译,北京：中国对外翻译出版公司,1999。
秦海鹰：《互文性理论的缘起与流变》,《外国文学评论》3(2004)：19-30
邱紫华陈素娥：“《十日谈》中喜剧精神与悲剧精神”,《四川大学学报》(哲学社会科学版)2(2003)：72-79。
热奈特,热拉尔：《隐迹稿本》,《热奈特论文集》,史忠义译,天津：百花文艺出版社,2001。
---：《叙事话语、新叙事话语》,王文融译,北京：中国社会科学出版社,1990。
任岩：《英国十四世纪的生活画卷——论乔叟的(坎特伯雷故事)》,吉林大学硕士论文,2004年3月。
塞尔登,拉曼编：《文学批评理论——从柏拉图到现在》,刘象愚、陈永国等译,北京：北京大学出版社,2003。
桑德斯,安德鲁：《牛津简明英国文学史》(修订本),谷启楠等译,北京：人民文学出版社,2000。
申丹：《叙述学与小说文体学研究》,北京：北京大学出版社,1998。
申丹、王丽亚著：《西方叙事学：经典与后经典》,北京：北京大学出版社,2010。
申丹、韩加明、王丽亚：《英美小说叙事理论研究》,北京：北京大学出版社,2009。
申富英：《英美现代主义文学新视野》,济南：山东大学出版社,2007。
史亚娟：《二十世纪英美<坎特伯雷故事>研究概述》,《菏泽学院学报》,1(2009)：34-38。
---：《文化的狂欢——文化诗学视野下的(坎特伯雷故事)》,首都师范大学博士论文,2008年5月。
孙津：《基督教与美学》,重庆：重庆人民出版社,1990。
田薇：《信仰与理性：中世纪基督教文化的兴衰》,保定：河北大学出版社,2001。
谭博忆：《论巴赫金的对话理论》,东北师范大学硕士论文,2005年5月。
汤普森,J.W：《中世纪晚期欧洲经济社会史》,徐家玲等译,北京：商务印书馆,1996。
童庆炳、陶东风编：《文学经典的建构、解构和重构》,北京：北京大学出版社, 2007。
托多罗夫(法)：《巴赫金对话理论及其他》,蒋子华、张萍译,天津：百花文艺出版社,2001。
王佐良：《英国诗史》,南京：译林出版社,1997。
王守仁、方杰著：《英国文学简史》,上海：上海外语教育出版社,2006。
王瑾：《互文性》,桂林：广西师范大学出版社,2005。
王建刚：《狂欢诗学——巴赫金文学思想研究》,北京：学林出版社,2001。
王进：《新历史主义文化诗学——格林布拉特批评理论研究》,广州：暨南大学出版社,2012。
汪家海：《论<坎特伯雷故事>的多元化特征》,《学术界》,8(2013)：159-167。
---：《论<坎特伯雷故事>中的复调性对话》,《安徽大学学报》(哲学社会科学版)2(2014)：31-36
韦勒克：《文学理论》,北京：三联书店,1989。
翁义钦编：《外国文学与文化》,北京：新华出版社,1989。
伍尔夫(比利时)：《中古哲学与文明》,庆泽彭译,上海：华东师范大学出版社,2005。
夏忠宪：《巴赫金狂欢化诗学研究》,北京：北京师范大学出版社,2000。
肖明翰：《英语文学之父——杰弗里·乔叟》,北京：社会科学文献出版社,2005。
---：《英语文学传统之形成：中世纪英语文学研究》(上、下),北京：社会科学文献出版社,2009。
---：《宫廷爱情诗传统与乔叟的<公爵夫人颂>》,《外国文学研究》6(2003)：40-45。
---：《<坎特伯雷故事>与<十日谈>——薄伽丘的影响和乔叟的成就》,《国外文学》,3(2002)：77-86
---：《乔叟对英国文学的贡献》,《外国文学评论》,4(2001)：85-94。
---：《乔叟的探索与<百鸟议会>的成就》,《四川外语学院学报》,2(2002)：3-6。
---：《<声誉之宫>——乔叟对诗歌创作的探索》,《外国文学研究》,2(2002)：30-35
---：《中世纪浪漫传奇的性质与中古英语亚瑟王传奇之发展》,《四川师范大学学报》(社会科学版),1(2008)：75-81
---：《试论<坎特伯雷故事>的多元与复调》,《外国文学研究》,4(2006)：74-83。
---：《<坎特伯雷故事>的朝圣旅程与基督教传统》,《外国文学》,6(2004)：93-98
---：《乔叟文学思想初探》,《国外文学》,3(2011)：28-36
肖四新：《欧洲文学与基督教》,广州：暨南大学出版社,2013。
肖锋：《巴赫金“微型对话”与“大型对话”》,《俄罗斯文艺》,5(2002)：70-73
谢大卫(加)：《圣书的子民：基督教的特质和文本传统》,李毅译,北京：中国人大出版社,2005。
希尔,弗里德里希(奥地利)著：《欧洲思想史》,赵复三译,桂林：广西师范大学出版社,2007。
亚里士多德：《诗学》,陈中梅译,北京：商务印书馆,1996。
阎国忠：《美是上帝的名字：中世纪神学美学》,上海：上海社会科学院出版社,2003。
杨周翰：《欧洲文学史》,北京：人民文学出版社,1983。
杨慧林、黄晋凯：《欧洲中世纪文学史》,南京：译林出版社,2001。
姚斯,H.R(德)、霍拉勃,R.C(美)：《接受美学与接受理论》,周宁、金元浦译,沈阳：辽宁人民出版社,1987。
伊格尔顿,特里：《当代西方文学理论》,王逢振译.北京：中国社会科学出版社,1998。
张首印：《西方二十世纪文论史》,北京：北京大学出版社,1999。
张杰：《复调小说理论研究》,桂林：漓江出版社,1992。
张金凤：《狂欢和对话：对<坎特伯雷故事>的重新解读》,《四川外语学院学报》,2(2003)：52-55
张京媛编：《新历史主义与文学批评》,北京：北京大学出版社,1993。
张进：《新历史主义与历史诗学》,北京：中国社会科学出版社,2004。
张寅德：《叙述学研究》,北京：中国社会科学出版社,1989。
张开炎：《开放人格——巴赫金》,武汉：长江文艺出版社,2000。
赵一凡等编：《西方文论关键词》,北京：外语教学与研究出版社,2006。
---：《从胡塞尔到德里达：西方文论讲稿》,北京：三联书店,2007。
赵毅衡：《新批评——一种独特的形式主义文论》,北京：中国社会科学出版社,1986。
周春生：《文艺复兴史研究入门》,北京：北京大学出版社,2009。
周启超：《对话与建构》,合肥：安徽文艺出版社,2004。
朱刚编著：《二十世纪西方文论》,北京：北京大学出版社,2006。
朱立元编著：《当代西方文艺理论》,上海：华东师范大学出版社,1997。
② 参见John H. Fisher, The Importance of Chaucer (Carbondale and Edwardsville:Southern Illinois UP,1992)148-150.
① 详见Piero Boitani, English Medieval Narrative in the 13th and 14th Centuries, trans. Joan Krakover Hall (Cambridge:Cambridge UP,1982)138-273.
① 参见Corinne Saunders, ed., "The Development of Chaucer Criticism." In Chaucer,5-21, Blackwell Guides to Criticism (Oxford:Blackwell,2001) 10.
② 详见C. S. Lewis, The Allegory of Love: A Study in Medieval Tradition (London: Oxford UP, 1936) 157-198.
① 参见D.W. Robertson, A Preface to Chaucer: Studies in Medieval Perspective (New Jersey: Princeton UP,1962)3.
① 参见Ralph. Baldwin, The Unity of Canterbury Tales (Copenhagen:Rosenkilde and Bagger, 1955).
② 参见Bernard F. Huppe, A Reading of the Canterbury Tales (New York:State U of New York, 1967).
③ 本森(Benson)认为乔叟为每则故事创造出完整的,富有独特的诗学形式,这一点以往从未有人如此做过。具体参见C David. Benson, Chaucer's Drama of Style: Poetic Variety and Contrast in the Canterbury Tales (Chapel Hill:University of North Carolina Press,1986) 20-25.
② 参见Robert M. Jordan, Chaucer's Poetics and the Modern Reader (Berkeley:U of California P, 1987) 20.
① 参见Kathryn L. Lynch, ed., Chaucer s Cultural Geography (New York:London: Routledge, 2002).
② 详见李耀宗：“汉译欧洲中古文学的回顾与展望”,《国外文学》1(2003)27
① 黄呆忻先生诗体翻译的《坎特伯雷故事》最早是在1999年由南京译林出版社出版,后有2001年台北猫头鹰出版社出版,2007年由上海译文出版社出版。
① 参见肖明翰：《乔叟对英国文学的贡献》,载《外国文学评论》,2001年第四期,第85-94页。
①《玫瑰传奇》寓梦幻、传奇、寓意于一体,是法国中世纪一部经典传奇作品,乔叟的诗歌艺术创作手法深受其影响。
②参见肖明翰,《<坎特伯雷故事>的朝圣旅程与基督教传统》,载《外国文学》,2004年第6期,第93-98页。
① 如乔叟在早期创作的《声誉之宫》中就曾使用这种艺术表现手法。
① 参见刘进：《乔叟梦幻诗研究》,北京：社会科学文献出版社,2011年,第11-12页。
① 本文所引《坎特伯雷故事》中的原文均出自杰弗里·乔叟：《坎特伯雷故事》,黄杲炘译,上海：上海译文出版社,2007年。
① 详见Judith Ferster, "Genre in and of the Canterbury Tales", in Saunders's A Concise Companion to Chaucer, (Oxford:Blackwell,2006) 181.
① 详见布斯：《小说修辞学》,华明等译,北京：北京大学出版社,1987年,第80—82页。
① 有关乔叟诗歌中的反讽艺术,详见Earle Birney, Essays on Chaucerian Irony (Toronto: Toronto UP,1985).
① 参见R. M. Wilson, Early Middle English Literature，3rd(London: Methuen,1968) 193.
① 在《百鸟议会》里,乔叟借用鸟类开会择偶的故事来隐射当时英国社会中存在的问题。
② 《圣经》,新约全书,提摩太前书的第6章10节,第334页。
① 在中世纪,基督教神学是占绝对统治地位的思想体系,在意识形态领域里具有无上的权威,对人们的精神文化生活产生巨大的影响,所以被称为“信仰的时代”。详见埃文斯(Evans),G.R：《中世纪的信仰》,茆卫彤译,北京：北京大学出版社,2005年。
① 参见Piero Boitani and Jill Mann, eds., The Cambridge Companion to Chaucer,2nd ed. (Cambridge:Cambridge UP,2003) 17.
② 这一观念源自《圣经》。Dyas将人生喻为去往天堂的朝圣旅程(life conceived as a pilgrimage towards a heavenly destination),她认为,相对于去圣地朝圣,人生的朝圣历程更有意义,具体详见Dee Dyas, Pilgrimage in Medieval English Literature 700-1500 (Cambridge:Cambridge UP,2001)247.
① 参见C.David Benson,"Their Telling Difference:Chaucer the Pilgrim and His Two Contrasting Tales", Chaucer Review 18,(1983-84):71.
① 详见肖明翰：《英语文学传统之形成：中世纪英语文学研究》(上、下),北京：社会科学文献出版社,2009年,第619-620页。
② 参见韦勒克、沃伦著：《文学理论》,刘象愚等译,北京：三联书店,1989年,第72页。
① 详见Harold Bloom, ed., Geoffrey Chaucer s The Canterbury Tales (New York:Infobase,2008) 90.
① 详见肖锋：《巴赫金“微型对话”与“大型对话”》,载《俄罗斯文艺》,2002年第5期,第70-73页。
① 详见肖明翰：《《试论<坎特伯雷故事>的多元与复调》,载《外国文学研究》,2006年第四期,第74-83页。
① 《圣经·新约全书·提摩太前书》6：10。
① 详见乔纳森·卡勒：《结构主义诗学》,盛宁译,北京：中国社会科学出版社,1991年。
① 详见John Hines, The Fabliau in English (London:Longman,1993) 1-23.
① 详见查尔斯·霍默·哈斯金斯：《12世纪文艺复兴》,夏继果译,上海：上海人民出版社,2005年。
① 详见史亚娟的博士论文《文化的狂欢——文化诗学视野下的<坎特伯雷故事>》,首都师范大学,2008年,第71-75页。
① 参见白春仁：《巴赫金——求索对话思维》,载《文学评论》,1998年第五期,第102页。
② 参见史亚娟的博士论文《文化的狂欢：文化诗学视野下的<坎特伯雷故事>》中绪论部分第21-22页。
① 详见巴赫金：《巴赫金全集第六卷》,李兆年、夏忠宪等译,石家庄：河北教育出版社,1998年,第4页。
① 详见巴赫金：《巴赫金全集》(第六卷)拉伯雷研究,李兆林,夏忠宪等译,石家庄：河北教育出版社,1998年,第5-20页
① 特勒将林勃或临界状态(liminality)定义为路途或疆界中的过渡状态或过程,他认为朝圣旅程是一种从常规的社会责任和压力中解脱出来的表征形式。具体详见Victor Turner and Edith Turner, Image and Pilgrimage in Christian Perspective:Anthropological Perspectives (Oxford:Blackwell,1978)7.
① 详见Laura Kendrick, Chaucerian Play: Comedy and Control in The Canterbury Tales (Berkeley: U of California P,1988) 111-121.
① 参见何岳球：((<坎特伯雷故事>中的狂欢化喜剧特色》,载《外国文学研究》,2003年第2期,第55-59页。
①详见约翰·赫伊津哈(荷)：《中世纪的衰落》,杭州：中国美术学院出版社,1997年。
① 详见Derek Brewer,Tradition and Innovation in Chaucer (Maiden: Blackwell,2004) 91.
② 参见马克思、恩格斯：《马克思恩格斯选集》第1卷,北京：人民出版社,1995年,第269页。
① 详见R.A. Shoaf, Dante, Chaucer and the Currency of the Word: Money, Image, Reference in Late Medieval Poetry. (Okla: Pilgrim Books,1983).
② 详见Winthrop Wetherbee, Chaucer and the Poets:An Essay on Troilus and Criseyde (Ithaca: Cornell UP,1984).
③ 参见Karla Taylor, Chaucer Reads the Divine Comedy (Stanford,CA:Stanford UP,1989) 209.
① 详见Richard Neuse, Chaucer's Dante: Allegory and Epic Theatre in The Canterbury Tales (Berkeley and Los Angeles:U of California P,1991) 15-140.
① 薄伽丘的《菲洛斯特拉托》和《苔塞伊达》是两部八行体的长诗,分别从维吉尔的《埃涅阿斯纪》和《特洛伊传奇》中汲取素材,歌颂了现实生活的美好和爱情的欢乐,开创意大利骑士史诗和民间说唱文学的先河。《骑士的故事》早在诗人创作《坎特伯雷故事》之前便已完成,后被诗人编入作品中。
② 中世纪文学将娱乐作为文学创作的理想目标。
③ 详见W.F Bryan and Germaine Dempster, eds., Sources and Analogues of the Chaucer's the Canterbury Tales (Chicago:U of Chicago P.1941)14-20.
① 意大利评论界把薄伽丘的《十日谈》和但丁的《神曲》相媲美,称之为《人曲》。
①参见肖明翰：《<坎特伯雷故事>与<十日谈>——薄伽丘的影响和乔叟的成就》,载《国外文学》,2002年第3期,第77-86页。
① 转引自胡龙彪：《拉丁教父波爱修斯》,北京：商务印书馆,2006年,第6页。
① 参见《圣经,新约全书》,提摩太前书的第6章10节,第334页。
① 参见Piero Boitani, English Medieval Narrative in the 13th and 14th Centuries, trans. Joan Krakover Hall, (Cambridge: Cambridge UP,1982)137.
① 参见肖明翰：《乔叟的探索与<百鸟议会>的成就》,载《四川外语学院学报》,2002年第2期,第3-6页。
Abbot, H. Porter. The Cambridge Introduction to Narrative. Cambridge:Cambridge UP,2002.
Aers, David. Chaucer, Langland, and the Creative Imagination. London:Routledge and Kegan Paul,1980.
Andrew, Malcolm, ed. Critical Essays on Chaucer's Canterbury Tales. Milton Keynes: Open UP,1991.
Astell, A. W. Chaucer and the Universe of Learning. Ithaca: Cornell UP,1996.
Atkins, J. W. H. English Literary Criticism: The Medieval Phase. Gloucester, Mass: Peter Smith,1961.
Auerbach, Erich. Mimesis: The Representation of Reality in Western Literature. Trans. Willard R.Trask. Princeton: Princeton UP,1968.
Bakhtin, Mikahil. Rabelais and His World. Trans. Helene Iswolsky. Bloomington: Indiana UP,1984.
--. The Dialogical Imagination: Four Essays. Trans. Caryl Emerson and Michael Holquist. Austin: Texas UP,1981.
---. Problems of Dostoevsky's Poetics. Trans. Caryl. Emerson. Minneapolis:U of Minnesota P,1984.
--- and P.M.Medvedev, The Formal Method in Literary Scholarship. Albert J.Wehrle, ed. Cambridge:Harvard UP,1985.
Bal, Mieke. Narratologie. Paris:Klincksieck,1977.
Baldwin, Ralph. The Unity of Canterbury Tales. Copenhagen:Rosenkilde and Bagger, 1955.
Barron, W. R. J, English Medieval Romance. London and New York:Longman,1987.
Baum, Paul F. Chaucer's Verse. Durham:Duke UP,1961.
Benson, C.David. Chaucer s Drama of Style: Poetic Variety and Contrast in the Canterbury Tales. Chapel Hill:U of North Carolina P,1986.
---. "Their Telling Difference:Chaucer the Pilgrim and His Two Contrasting Tales". Chaucer Review 18 (1983-84):71.
---and E.Robertson. Chaucer s Religious Tales. Cambridge:Harvard UP,1990.
Benson, L.D, ed. The Riverside Chaucer. Oxford: Oxford UP,1988.
Benson, Robert G. and Susan J.Ridyard eds. New Readings of Chaucer's Poetry. Suffolk: Edmundsbury,2003.
Besserman, Lawrence. Chaucer's Biblical Poetics. Norman:U of Oklahoma P,1998.
Birney, Earle. Essays on Chaucerian Irony. Toronto:Toronto UP,1985.
Bisson, Lillian M. Chaucer and the Late Medieval World. New York:St.Martin's, 1998.
Bishop, Ian. The Narrative Art of the Canterbury Tales. London:Guensey,1987.
Blamires, Alcuin. Chaucer, Ethics and Gender. Oxford:Oxford UP,2006.
Blake, William. "Prospectus of the Engraving of Chaucer's Canterbury Pilgrims, in Poetry and Prose of William Blake, ed. Geoffrey Keynes. London,1943.
Blake, Norman. The English Language in Medieval Literature. London: J.M.Den&Sons,1977.
Bloom, Harold, ed. Geoffrey Chaucer's The Canterbury Tales. New York:Infobase, 2008.
---, ed. Classical Critical Views: Geoffrey Chaucer. New York:Infobase,2008.
---. The Western Canon. New York: Harcourt Brace,1994.
Boitani, Piero. English Medieval Narrative in the 13th and 14th Centuries. Trans. Joan Krakover Hall, Cambridge: Cambridge UP,1982.
--- and Jill Mann, eds. The Cambridge Companion to Chaucer.2nd Ed. Cambridge: Cambridge UP,2003.
---, ed.Chaucer and the Italian Trecento. London:Cambridge UP,1985.
Boethius. The Consolation of Philosophy. Trans. V.E.Watts. New York:Penguin, 1969.
Booth, Wayne C. The Rhetoric of Fiction. Chicago:U of Chicago P,1961.
Bracton, On the Laws and Customs of England, eds and Trans. G.E. Woodbine and S.E.Thorne, Vo1.2. Cambridge:Mass,1968.
Brewer, Derek. Tradition and Innovation in Chaucer. Malden:Blackwell,2004.
---. Chaucer: The Poet as Storyteller. London:Macmillan,1984.
---. An Introduction to Chaucer. London and New York:Longman,1984.
---. English Gothic Literature. London: Macmilian,1983.
---, ed. Geoffrey Chaucer: The Critical Heritage,1385-1837. Vo1.1. London: Routledge,1978.
---, Chaucer (1953),3rd ed. London:Longmans,1973.
---, ed. Medieval Comic Tales.2nd ed. Cambridge:Brewer,1996.
Brown, Peter, ed. A Companion to Medieval English Literature and Culture 1350-1500. Oxford:Blackwell,2007.
---, ed. A Companion to Chaucer. Oxford:Blackwell,2000.
Brown, Peter and Andrew Butcher. The Age of Saturn:Literature and History in the Canterbury Tales. Cambridge, MA:Basil Blackwell,1991.
Bryan, W. F, and Germaine Dempster, eds, Sources and Analogues of the Chaucer's the Canterbury Tales. Chicago:U of Chicago P.1941.
Burger, Glenn. Chaucer s Queer Nation. Minneapolis:U of Minnesota P,2003.
Burrow, J.A. "Irony in the Merchant's Tale". Anglia 75, (1957):199-208
---. Essays on Medieval Literature. Oxford:Oxford UP,1984.
---.Ricardian Poetry: Chaucer, Gower, Langland and the Gawain Poet. New Haven: Yale UP,1971.
---.Geoffrey Chaucer: A Critical Anthology. Harmondsworth:Penguin,1969.
Cannon, Christopher. The Making of Chaucer's English. Cambridge:Cambridge UP, 1998.
Chatman, Seymour. Story and Discourse: Narrative Structure in Fiction and Film. Ithaca: Cornell UP,1978.
Chaucer, Geoffrey. The Canterbury Tales. Trans. Nevill Coghill,Harmondsworth: Penguin,1951.
--. The Canterbury Tales (Modern English Version).Trans. David Wright, Oxford: Oxford UP,1985.
Clawson, W. H. "The Framework of the Canterbury Tales". University of Toronto Quarterly,20 (1951):147-150.
Cooper, Helen. The Structure of The Canterbury Tales. Athens:U of Georgia P,1984.
---. Oxford Guides to Chaucer: The Canterbury Tales. New York:Oxford UP,1989.
Coulton, G.C. Chaucer and His England. London:Methuen,1998.
Cox, C. Gender and Language in Chaucer. Gainesville:U of Florida P,1997.
Craik, T.W. The Comic Tales of Chaucer. London: Methuen,1964.
Crane, Susan. Gender and Romance in Chaucer's Canterbury Tales. Princeton: Princeton UP,1994.
Crow. Martin M. and Clair C.Olson, eds. Chaucer Life-Records. Oxford:Oxford UP, 1966.
Dante Alighieri, Dantis Alegherii Epistolae:The Letters of Dante.2nd ed. Trans. Paget Jackson Toynbee. Oxford: Clarendon,1966.
David, Alfred. The Strumpet Muse:Art and Morals in Chaucer s Poetry. Bloomington and London:Indiana UP,1976.
Dempster, Germaine. Dramatic Irony in Chaucer. New York:Humanities,1959.
Dinshaw, Carolyn. Chaucer's Sexual Poetics. Madison:U of Wisconsin P,1989.
Donaldson, E.T. Speaking of Chaucer. London:Athlone,1970.
Drabble, Margaret, ed. The Oxford Companion to English Literature. Beijing:Foreign Language Teaching and Research,2005.
Dyas, Dee. Pilgrimage in Medieval English Literature 700-1500. Cambridge: Cambridge UP,2001
Eagleton, Terry. Literary Theory: An Introduction. Oxford: Worcester,1983.
Eco, Umberto. The Role of the Reader:Explorations in the Semiotics of Texts. Bloomington:Indiana UP,1979.
Edwards, Philip. Pilgrimage and Literary Tradition. Cambridge:Cambridge UP, 2005.
Edwards, Robert R. Chaucer and Boccaccio:Antiquity and Modernity. New York: Palgrave,2002.
Eliot, T S. "Tradition and the Individual Talent." 20th Century Literary Criticism:A Reader, ed. David Lodge. London:Longman,1972.
Ellis, Roger. Patterns of Religious Narrative in the Canterbury Tales. London:Croom Helm,1986.
Ellis, Steve, ed. Chaucer: An Oxford Guide. New York:Oxford UP,2005.
Fein, Susanna Greer, David Raybin and Peter C. Braeger. Rebels and Rivals:The Contestive Spirit in the Canterbury Tales. Kalamazoo:Western Michigan,1991.
Ferster, Judith. Chaucer on Interpretation, Cambridge:Cambridge UP,1985.
Fish, Stanley. Is there a text in this class? The Authority of Interpretive Communities. Cambridge:Harvard UP,1980.
Fisher, John H. The Importance of Chaucer. Carbondale and Edwardsville:Southern Illinois UP,1992.
Ford, Boris, ed. The Age of Chaucer, Volume 1. Harmondsworth:Penguin,1954.
Forster, E. M. Aspects of the Novel. London:Hodder&Stoughton,1993.
Frye, Northrop. Anatomy of Criticism, Third Essay, and The Secular Scripture:A Study of the Structure of Romance. Princeton:Princeton UP,1957.
Fyler, John M. Chaucer and Ovid. New Haven and London: Yale UP,1979.
Ganim, John M. Chaucerian Theatricality. Princeton:Princeton UP,1990.
Gardner, J. The Life and Times of Chaucer. London:Jonathan Cape,1977.
Gaylord, Alan T. Essays on the Art of Chaucer's Verse. New York: Routledge,2001.
Genette, Gerard. Narrative Discourse. Trans. Jane E. Lewin. Ithaca: Cornell UP,1980.
Gibson, M.T, ed. Boethius, His Life, Thought and Influence. Oxford: Basil Blackwell,1981.
Gittes, Katharine S. Framing The Canterbury Tales: Chaucer and the Medieval Frame Narrative Tradition. New York:Greeenwood Press,1991.
Gray, Douglas, ed. The Oxford Companion to Chaucer. Oxford:Oxford UP,2004.
Green, Richard Firth. A Crisis of Truth: Literature and Law in Ricardian England. Philadelphia: U of Pennsylvania P,1999.
Greenblatt, Stephen, ed. The Norton Anthology of English Literatrure (8th Edition) New York:Norton,2006.
---. Renaissance Self-Fashioning: From More to Shakespeare.Chicago: U of Chicago P,1980.
Greene, Joseph E. Geoffrey Chaucer's Canterbury Tales. Simon & Schuster Interpress, 1997.
Guerin, Wilfred L. A Handbook of Critical Approaches to Literature. Beijing:Foreign Language and Research,2004.
Hallissy, Margaret. A Companion to Chaucer's Canterbury Tales. London: Greenwood,1995.
Hanawalt, Barbara A, ed. Chaucer's England: Literature and Historical Context. Minneapolis:U of Minnesota P,1992.
Hansen, Elaine Tuttle. Chaucer and the Fictions of Gender. Berkeley:U of California P,1992.
Hardie, Philip. The Cambridge Companion to Ovid. Shanghai:Shanghai Foreign Language Education,2004.
Heer, Friedrich. The Medieval World. New York:Penguin Books Ltd,1961.
Hefferman, Carol Falvo. The Orient in Chaucer and Medieval Romance. Cambridge: Brewer,2003.
Herman, David et. Al, eds. Routledge Encyclopedia of Narrative Theory. London: Routledge,2005.
Hill, John M. Chaucerian Belief: The Poetics of Reverence and Delight. New Haven: Yale UP,1991.
Hines, John. The Fabliau in English. London: Longman,1993.
Hirsh, John C. Chaucer and the Canterbury Tales: A Short Introduction. London: Blackwell,2003.
Hoffman, Arthur W.'Chaucer's Prologue to Pilgrimage:The Two Voices', English Literary History 21 (1954):1-16.
Howard, Donald R. The Idea of The Canterbury Tales. Los Angeles: California UP, 1976.
---. Chaucer: His Life, His Works, His World. New York: E. P. Dutton,1987.
Howes, L. Chaucer's Gardens and the Language of Convention. Gainesville:U of Florida P,1997.
Huppe, Bernard F. A Reading of the Canterbury Tales. New York:State U of New YorkP,1967.
Iser, Wolfgang. The Implied Reader, Patterns of Communication in Prose Fiction from Bunyan to Beckett. Baltimore and London:The Johns Hopkins UP,1978.
Jeffrey, David Lyle, ed. Chaucer and Biblical Tradition. Ottawa: U of Ottawa P,1984.
Jones, Terry. Chaucer's Knight: The Portrait of a Medieval Mercenary. London: Methuen,1982.
Jordan, Robert M. Chaucer & the Shape of Creation. Cambridge:Harvard UP,1967.
---. Chaucer's Poetics and the Modern Reader. Berkeley:U of California P,1987
Josipovici,G..D. Fiction and Game in The Canterbury Tales,189-190, Critical Quarterly 7,1965.
Jost, Jean E, ed. Chaucer's Humor: Critical Essays. Garland Studies in Humor 5. New York:Garland,1994.
Kean, P. M. Chaucer and the Making of English Poetry. London:Routledge,1972.
Keen, Maurice. Chivalry. New Haven:Yale UP,1984.
Kendrick, Laura. Chaucerian Play: Comedy and Control in The Canterbury Tales. Berkeley:U of California P,1988.
Ker, W.P. The Dark Ages. New York:New American Library,1923.
Kittredge, George L. Chaucer and His Poetry. Cambridge:Harvard UP,1970.
Knapp, Peggy Ann. Chaucer and the Social Contest. Routledge:Chapman,1990.
Koff, Leonard Michael. Chaucer and the Art of Storytelling. Berkeley:U of California P,1988.
Kolve, V.A. Chaucer and the Imagery of Narrative. London:Edward Arnold,1984.
Koonce, B.G. Chaucer and the Tradition of Fame. Princeton:Princeton UP,1966.
Kratzmann, Gregory, and James Simpton, eds. Medieval English Religious and Ethical Literature. Cambridge:Brewer,1968.
Kristeva, Julia.Semiotike: Recherches pour une semanalyse. Paris:Seuil,1969.
---. La Revolution du language poetique. Paris:Seuil,1974.
---. Word, Dialogue and the Novel, The Kristeva Reader, ed. Toril Moi. New York: Columbia UP,1986.
Kruger, Steven F. Dreaming in the Middle Ages. Cambridge:Cambridge UP,1992.
Lambdin, Laura C.and Robert T. Lambdin, eds. Chaucer's Pilgrims: A Historical Guide to the Pilgrims in The Canterbury Tales. London: Greenwood,1996.
Laskaya, Anna. Chaucer's Approach to Gender in the Canterbury Tales. Chaucer Studies 23. Cambridge:Brewer,1995.
Lawrence, William Witherle. Chaucer and the Canterbury Tales. New York: Biblo and Tannen,1969.
Lawton, David. "Chaucer's Narrators". Chaucer Studies,12. Cambridge:Brewer, 1985.
Leech, Geoffrey and Michael Short. Style in Fiction. London:Longman,1981.
Leff, G. Medieval Thought: St. Augustine to Ockham. Harmondsworth:Penguin,1958.
Lerer, Seith.The Yale Companion to Chaucer. New York: Yale UP,2006.
Lewis, C. S. The Allegory of Love: A Study in Medieval Tradition. London:Oxford UP, 1936.
Leyerle, John and Anne Quick, eds. Chaucer: A Bibliographical Introduction. Toronto: U of Toronto P,1986.
Lindahl, Carl. Earnest Games: Folkloric Patterns in the Canterbury Tales. Bloomington:Indiana UP,1987.
Lounsbury, Thomas R. Studies in Chaucer,3 vols. New York:Russell,1962.
Lowes, John Livingston. Geoffrey Chaucer. Oxford:Clarendon,1934.
Lubbock, Percy. The Craft of Fiction. New York: Viking,1957.
Lumiansky, R.M. Of Sondry Folk: The Dramatic Principle in the Canterbury Tales. U of Texas P,1980.
Lynch, Kathryn L, ed. Chaucer s Cultural Geography. New York:Routledge,2002.
---. Chaucer's Philosophical Visions. Chaucer Studies 26. Cambridge:Brewer,2000.
Manly, John Matthews, Some New Light on Chaucer. New York:Henry Holt,1926.
Mann, Jill. Chaucer and Medieval Estates Satire: The Literature of Social Classes and the General Prologue to the Canterbury Tales. Cambridge:Cambridge UP,1973.
Marenbon, John. Boethius, Oxford:Oxford UP,2003.
Marshall, Leicester H.Jr, "The Art of Impersonation:A General Prologue to the CT, PMLA 95(1980) " The Speaker of the Canterbury Tales:222
Martin, Priscilla. Chaucer's Women: Nuns, Wives and Amazons. Iowa City:U of Iowa P,1990.
McClellan, William. "Bakhtin's Theory of Dialogic Discourse, Medieval Rhetorial Theory and the Multi-Voiced Structure of the Clerk's Tale". Exemplaria 1.2, 1989.
Mehl, Dieter. Geoffrey Chaucer: An Introduction to his Narrative Poetry. Cambridge: Cambridge UP,1986.
---. English Literature in the Age of Chaucer. London:Pearson,2001.
Menocal, Maria Rosa. Arabic Role in Medieval Literary History: A Forgotten Heritage. Philadelphia: U of Pennsylvania P,1987.
Metlitzki, Dorothee. The Matter of Araby in Medieval England. New Haven:Yale UP, 1977.
Miller, Mark. Philosophical Chaucer: Love, Sex and Agency in the Canterbury Tales. Cambridge:Cambridge UP,2004.
Miller, R. P, ed. Chaucer, Sources and Background. Oxford:Oxford UP,1977.
Minnis, A.J.Chaucer and Pagan Antiquity: Cambridge:Brewer,1982.
Morgan, Kenneth O. The Oxford History of Britain. Beijing:Foreign Language Teaching and Research,2007.
Muscatine, Charles. Medieval Literature, Style and Culture. Columbia: U of South Carolina P,1999.
---. Chaucer and the French Tradition: A Study in Style and Meaning. Berkeley and Los Angeles:U of California P,1957.
---. The Old French Fabliau. New Haven and London:Yale UP,1986.
Neuse, Richard. Chaucer s Dante: Allegory and Epic Theatre in The Canterbury Tales. Berkeley and Los Angeles:U of California P,1991.
North, J.D. Chaucer's Universe. Oxford:Clarendon,1988.
O'Donoglue, Bernard, ed. The Courtly Tradition. Manchester: Manchester UP,1982.
Olson, Paul. The Canterbury Tales and the Good Society. Princeton:Princeton UP, 1986.
Owen, Charles A., Jr. Pilgrimage and Storytelling in the Canterbury Tales: The Dialectic of Ernest and Game. Norman: U of Oklahoma P,1977.
Pascal, Roy. The Dual Voice. Manchester: Manchester UP,1977.
Patterson, Lee. Temporal Circumstances: Form and History in The Canterbury Tales, New York: Macmillan,2006.
---.Chaucer and the Subject of History. London:Routledge,1991.
Pearsall, Derek. A Critical Biography: The life of Geoffrey Chaucer. Oxford: Blackwell,1992.
---.The Canterbury Tales. London:George Allen,1985.
Phillips, Helen. An Introduction to the Canterbury Tales. New York: Martin's,2000.
Phillips, Helen and Nick Havely, eds. Chaucer's Dream Poetry. Burnt Mill:Longman, 1994.
Pickering, Francis P. Literature and Art in the Middle Ages. Coral Gables:U of Miami P,1970.
Prior, Sandra Pierson, "Parodying Typology and the Mystery Plays in the Miller's Tale." Journal of Medieval and Renaissance Studies 16(1986):57.
Quilligan, Maureen. The Language of Allegory: Defining the Genre. Ithaca: Cornell UP,1979.
Quinn, William A. Chaucer s Dream Visions and Shorter Poems. New York:Garland, 1999.
Rigby, S.H. Chaucer in Context: Society, Allegory and Gender. Manchester: Manchester UP,1996.
Rigg, A.G. A History of Anglo-Latin Literature,1066-1422. Cambridge:Cambridge UP,1992.
Robertson, D.W, Jr. A Preface to Chaucer: Studies in Medieval Perspective. New Jersey:Princeton UP,1962.
Robinson, F. N, ed. The Works of Geoffrey Chaucer,2nd Ed. Boston: Houghton Mifflin, 1957.
Robinson, Ian. Chaucer and the English Tradtion. Cambridge:Cambridge UP,1972.
Root, Robert Kilburn. The Poetry of Chaucer:A Guide to Its Study and Appreciation. Cambridge:Riberrsine,1922.
Rubin, Miri. Gentile Tales: The Narrative Assault on Late Medieval Jews. New Haven: Yale UP,1999.
Rudd, Gillian. The Complete Critical Guide to Geoffrey Chaucer, London: Routledge, 2001.
Rudd, N. The Classical Tradition in Operation. Toronto:U of Toronto P,1994.
Ruth Morse and Barry Windeatt, eds. Chaucer Traditions: Studies in Honor of Derek Brewer, Cambridge:Cambridge UP,1990.
Saunders, Corinne, ed. A Companion to Romance from Classical to Contemporary. Malden:Blackwell,2004.
--, ed. A Concise Companion to Chaucer. Oxford: Blackwell,2006.
---. Chaucer. Oxford:Blackwell,2001.
---. "The Development of Chaucer Criticism." In Corinne Saunders, ed. Chaucer,5-22, Blackwell Guides to Criticism. Oxford:Blackwell,2001.
Scanlon, Larry, ed. The Cambridge Companion to Medieval English Literature 1100-1500. Cambridge: Cambridge UP,2009.
Schless, Howard. Chaucer and Dante:A Revaluation. Norman, Okla: Pilgrim,1984.
Schlauch, M. English Medieval Literature and Its Social Foundations. London: Oxford UP,1956.
Shoaf, R.A. Dante, Chaucer and the Currency of the Word: Money, Image, Reference in Late Medieval Poetry. Norman, Okla: Pilgrim,1983.
Skeat, W.W, ed. The Works of Geoffrey Chaucer.7 vols. Oxford:Clarendon P, 1894-1897.
---. ed. Chaucerian and Other Pieces: Being a Supplement to the Complete Works of Geoffrey Chaucer. Oxford:Clarendon P,1897.
Skute, Larry. Virtue of Necessity: Inconclusiveness and Narrative Form in Chaucer's Poetry. Columbus:Ohio State UP,1984.
Southern, R.W. The Making of the Middle Ages. London:Hutchinson,1953.
Spearing, A.C. Medieval to Renaissance in English Poetry. Cambridge: Cambridge UP,1985.
Speirs, John. Chaucer the Maker. London: Faber,1951.
Spurgeon, C.F.E, ed. Five Hundred Years of Chaucer Criticism and Allusion, 1357-1900, vol I. New York:Russell,1960.
Stanzel, F.K. A Theory of Narrative. Cambridge:Cambridge UP,1984.
Stillinger, Thomas C, ed. Critical Essays on Geoffrey Chaucer. New York: G.K.Hall&Co.1998.
Strohm, Paul. Social Chaucer. Harvard:Harvard UP,1994.
Sumption, Jonathan. Pilgrimage:An Image of Medieval Religion. London:Faber, 1975.
Sypher, Wylie. Four Stages of Renaissance Style: Transformations in Art and Literature 1400-1700. Garden City, NY: Doubleday,1955.
Taylor, Karla. Chaucer Reads the Divine Comedy. Stanford, CA:Stanford UP,1989.
Turner, Victor. The Ritual Process: Structure and Anti-Structure. London: Routledge, 1969.
--- and Edith Turner. Image and Pilgrimage in Christian Perspective: Anthropological Perspectives. Oxford:Blackwell,1978.
Wagenknecht, Edward. Chaucer: Modern Essays in Criticism. Oxford: Oxford UP, 1959.
Wallace, David, ed. The Cambridge History of Medieval English Literature. Cambridge:Cambridge UP,1999.
---. Chaucerian Polity: Absolutist Lineages and Associational Forms in England and Italy. Standford:Standford UP,1997.
Wetherbee, Winthrop. Chaucer and the Poets:An Essay on Troilus and Criseyde. Ithaca: Cornell UP,1984.
Whittock, Trevor. A Reading of the Canterbury Tales. Cambridge:Cambridge UP, 1968.
Williams, David. The Canterbury Tales: A Literary Pilgrimage. Boston: GK.Hall, 1987.
Wilson, R. M. Early Middle English Literature,3rd. London: Methuen,1968.
Wimsatt, J.I. Chaucer and the French Love Poets. Chapel Hill:U of North Carolina P, 1968.
Windeatt, B, ed. Chaucer's Dream Poetry: Sources and Analogues. Cambridge and Totowa New Jersey: Brewer, Rowman and Littlefield,1982.
Woodring, Carl and James Shapiro. The Columbia History of British Poetry. Beijing: Foreign Language Teaching and Research,2005.
埃文斯(Evans), G. R:《中世纪的信仰》,茆卫彤译,北京：北京大学出版社,2005。
爱教,艾哈迈德(埃)：《阿拉伯一伊斯兰文化史》(第二册),纳忠等译,北京：商务印书馆,1990。
艾略特,T.S：《艾略特文学论文集》,李赋宁译,南昌：百花洲文艺出版社,1994。
奥维德：《变形记》,杨周翰译,北京：人民文学出版社,1984。
奥尔巴赫,埃里希(德)：《摹仿论——西方文学中所描绘的现实》,吴麟绶等译,天津：百花文艺出版社,2002。
巴尔,米克著：《叙述学：叙事理论导论》,谭君强译,北京：中国社会科学出版社,1995。
巴赫金,米哈伊尔：《巴赫金全集》(第五卷)诗学与访谈,白春仁,顾亚铃译,石家庄：河北教育出版社,1998。
---：《巴赫金全集》(第六卷)拉伯雷研究,李兆林,夏忠宪等译,石家庄：河北教育出版社,1998。
---：《巴赫金全集》(第四卷)文本对话人文,白春仁等译,石家庄：河北教育出版社,1998。
---：《巴赫金文论选》,北京：中国社会科学出版社,1996。
---：《陀思妥耶夫斯基诗学问题》,白春仁、顾亚铃译,北京：三联书店,1988。
---：《陀思妥耶夫斯基诗学问题》,刘虎译,中央编译出版社,2012。
白春仁.《巴赫金——求索对话思维》,《文学评论》,1998(5)：101-108
伯罗(Burrow), J. A:《中世纪作家与作品——中古英语文学及背景》,沈弘译,北京：北京大学出版社,2007。
本内特,朱迪斯·M、C·沃伦·霍利斯特：《欧洲中世纪史》,杨宁、李韵译, 上海：上海社会科学出版社,2007。
薄伽丘：《十日谈》,王永年译,北京：华夏出版社,2008。
波爱修斯(古罗马)：《哲学的慰藉》,代国强译,南昌：江西人民出版社,2007。
布朗,科林：《基督教与西方思想》(卷一),查常平译,北京：北京大学出版社,2005。
布斯,韦恩：《小说修辞学》,华明、胡晓苏、周宪等译,北京：北京大学出版社,1987。
布洛克,阿伦(英)：《西方人文主义传统》,董乐山译,北京：生活·读书·新知三联书店,1997。
布鲁姆,哈罗德：江宁康译,《西方正典》,南京：译林出版社,2005。
---：《影响的焦虑》,南京：江苏教育出版社,2005。
---：《误读之图》,纽约：牛津大学出版社,1975。
布克哈特,雅各布：《意大利文艺复兴时期的文化》,北京：商务印书馆,1979。
曹航：《乔叟<坎特伯雷故事)之独创性》,上海外国语大学博士论文,2008年5月。
陈才宇：《古英语与中古英语文学通论》,北京：商务印书馆,2007。
陈乐民：《欧洲文明十五讲》,北京：北京大学出版社,2004。
陈永国：《互文性》,赵一凡《西方文论关键词》217-21。
陈彦平：《论(坎特伯雷故事>的多样整合性》,吉林大学硕士论文,2008年3月。
程锡麟：《互文性理论述评》,《外国文学》1(1996)：72-78。
程正民：《巴赫金的文化诗学》,北京：北京师范大学出版社,2001年。
蒂费纳,萨莫瓦约(法)：《互文性研究》,邵炜译,天津：天津人民出版社,2003。
丁建宁：《超越的可能：作为知识分子的乔叟》,华东师范大学博士论文,2009年5月。
董希文著：《文学文本理论研究》,北京：社会科学文献出版社,2006。
董学文编：《西方文学理论史》,北京：北京大学出版社,2005。
法胡里,汉纳(黎)：《阿拉伯文学史》,邓溥浩译,北京：人民文学出版社,1990。
费尔巴哈：《基督教的本质》,朱震华译,北京：商务印书馆,1997。
费伦：《作为修辞的叙事》,陈永国译,北京：北京大学出版社,2002。
格茨,汉斯-维尔纳(德)：《欧洲中世纪生活》,王亚平译,北京：东方出版社,2002。
哈斯金斯,查尔斯·霍默：《12世纪文艺复兴》,夏继果译,上海：上海人民出版社,2005。
何岳球：《<坎特伯雷故事>中的狂欢化喜剧特色》,《外国文学研究》2(2003)：55-59
赫尔曼,戴卫：《新叙事学》,马海良译,北京：北京大学出版社,2002。
赫伊津哈,约翰(荷)：《中世纪的衰落》,杭州：中国美术学院出版社,1997。
胡金望等编：《文化诗学的理论与实践研究》,北京：中国社会科学出版社,2004。
胡亚敏：《叙事学》,武汉：华中师大出版社,1994。
黑格尔：《美学：第二卷》,北京：商务印书馆,1979。
蒋洪新：《英美诗歌选读》,长沙：湖南师大出版社,2004。
姜岳斌：《伦理的诗学——但丁诗学思想研究》,杭州：浙江大学出版社,2007。
金元浦：《文学解释学》,长春：东北师范大学出版社,1997。
凯特琳娜·克拉克；迈克尔·霍奎斯特(美)：《米哈伊尔·巴赫金》,语冰译,北京：人民大学出版社,1992。
莱恩,迈克尔(美)著：《文学作品的多重解读》,赵炎秋译,北京：北京大学出版社,2006。
兰格伦,威廉：《农夫皮尔斯》,沈弘译,北京：中国对外翻译出版公司,1999。
李赋宁编：《欧洲文学史》(第一卷),北京：商务印书馆,1999。
---：《蜜与蜡：西方文学阅读心得》,北京：北京大学出版社,1995。
李赋宁、何其莘编：《英国中古时期文学史》,北京：外语教学与研究出版社,2006。
李玉平：《多元文化时代的文学经典理论》,天津：南开大学出版社,2010。
李耀宗：“汉译欧洲中古文学的回顾与展望”,《国外文学》1(2003)23-33。
李维屏：《英国为小说人物史》,上海：上海外语教育出版社,2008。
利维斯,F.R.(英)：《伟大的传统》,袁伟译,北京：生活·读书·新知三联书店,2002。
梁工：《圣经叙事艺术研究》,北京：商务印书馆,2006。
---：《西方圣经批评引论》,北京：商务印书馆,2006。
梁工编：《基督教文学》,北京：宗教文化出版社,2001。
刘易斯,C.S：《中世纪和文艺复兴时期的文学研究》,胡虹译,上海：华东师范大学出版社,2010。
刘乃银：《巴赫金的理论与<坎特伯雷故事>》,上海：华东师范大学出版社,1999。
刘建军：《基督教文化与西方文学传统》,北京：北京大学出版社,2005。
---：《欧洲中世纪文学论稿》,北京：中华书局,2010。
刘进：《乔叟梦幻诗研究》,北京：社会科学文献出版社,2011。
---：《权威与经验之对话——乔叟梦幻诗研究》,湖南师范大学博士论文,2007年4月。
刘意青、罗经国编：《欧洲文学史第一卷》,北京：商务印书馆,1999。
刘康：《对话的喧声——巴赫金的文化转型理论》,北京：北京大学出版社,2011。
刘洋风：《矛盾中的萌芽》,南京师范大学硕士论文,2005年6月。
洛奇,戴维：《二十世纪文学评论》,上海：上海译文出版社,1987。
陆扬：《西方美学通史·中世纪文艺复兴美学》,上海：上海文艺出版社,1999。
---：《欧洲中世纪诗学》,上海：上海社会科学院出版社,2000。
---：《文艺复兴诗学》,上海：上海交通大学出版社,2012。
罗钢：《叙事学导论》,昆明：云南人民出版社,1994。
罗素：《西方哲学史(上、下)》,马元德译,北京：商务印书馆,1976。
凌建侯：《巴赫金哲学思想与文本分析法》,北京：北京大学出版社,2007。
马丁：《当代叙事学》,伍晓明译,北京：北京大学出版社,2005。
马新国主编：《西方文论史》,北京：高等教育出版社,1994。
马克思、恩格斯：《马克思恩格斯选集》第1卷,北京：人民出版社,1995。
梅兰：《巴赫金哲学美学和文学思想研究》,武汉：华中科技大学出版社,2005。
倪世光：《西欧中世纪骑士的生活》,保定：河北大学出版社,2004。
宁一中：《狂欢化与康拉德的小说世界》,长沙：湖南师范大学出版社,1999。
聂珍钊、杜娟等著： 《英国文学的伦理学批评》,上海：华中师范大学出版社,2007。
诺斯罗普·弗莱：《批评的剖析》,陈慧等译,天津：百花文艺出版社,1998。
乔叟,杰弗里：《坎特伯雷故事》,黄杲忻译,上海：上海译文出版社,2007。
---：《乔叟文集》(上、下),方重译,上海：上海译文出版社,1979。
---：《特洛勒斯与克丽西德》,吴芬译,北京：中国对外翻译出版公司,1999。
秦海鹰：《互文性理论的缘起与流变》,《外国文学评论》3(2004)：19-30
邱紫华陈素娥：“《十日谈》中喜剧精神与悲剧精神”,《四川大学学报》(哲学社会科学版)2(2003)：72-79。
热奈特,热拉尔：《隐迹稿本》,《热奈特论文集》,史忠义译,天津：百花文艺出版社,2001。
---：《叙事话语、新叙事话语》,王文融译,北京：中国社会科学出版社,1990。
任岩：《英国十四世纪的生活画卷——论乔叟的(坎特伯雷故事)》,吉林大学硕士论文,2004年3月。
塞尔登,拉曼编：《文学批评理论——从柏拉图到现在》,刘象愚、陈永国等译,北京：北京大学出版社,2003。
桑德斯,安德鲁：《牛津简明英国文学史》(修订本),谷启楠等译,北京：人民文学出版社,2000。
申丹：《叙述学与小说文体学研究》,北京：北京大学出版社,1998。
申丹、王丽亚著：《西方叙事学：经典与后经典》,北京：北京大学出版社,2010。
申丹、韩加明、王丽亚：《英美小说叙事理论研究》,北京：北京大学出版社,2009。
申富英：《英美现代主义文学新视野》,济南：山东大学出版社,2007。
史亚娟：《二十世纪英美<坎特伯雷故事>研究概述》,《菏泽学院学报》,1(2009)：34-38。
---：《文化的狂欢——文化诗学视野下的(坎特伯雷故事)》,首都师范大学博士论文,2008年5月。
孙津：《基督教与美学》,重庆：重庆人民出版社,1990。
田薇：《信仰与理性：中世纪基督教文化的兴衰》,保定：河北大学出版社,2001。
谭博忆：《论巴赫金的对话理论》,东北师范大学硕士论文,2005年5月。
汤普森,J.W：《中世纪晚期欧洲经济社会史》,徐家玲等译,北京：商务印书馆,1996。
童庆炳、陶东风编：《文学经典的建构、解构和重构》,北京：北京大学出版社, 2007。
托多罗夫(法)：《巴赫金对话理论及其他》,蒋子华、张萍译,天津：百花文艺出版社,2001。
王佐良：《英国诗史》,南京：译林出版社,1997。
王守仁、方杰著：《英国文学简史》,上海：上海外语教育出版社,2006。
王瑾：《互文性》,桂林：广西师范大学出版社,2005。
王建刚：《狂欢诗学——巴赫金文学思想研究》,北京：学林出版社,2001。
王进：《新历史主义文化诗学——格林布拉特批评理论研究》,广州：暨南大学出版社,2012。
汪家海：《论<坎特伯雷故事>的多元化特征》,《学术界》,8(2013)：159-167。
---：《论<坎特伯雷故事>中的复调性对话》,《安徽大学学报》(哲学社会科学版)2(2014)：31-36
韦勒克：《文学理论》,北京：三联书店,1989。
翁义钦编：《外国文学与文化》,北京：新华出版社,1989。
伍尔夫(比利时)：《中古哲学与文明》,庆泽彭译,上海：华东师范大学出版社,2005。
夏忠宪：《巴赫金狂欢化诗学研究》,北京：北京师范大学出版社,2000。
肖明翰：《英语文学之父——杰弗里·乔叟》,北京：社会科学文献出版社,2005。
---：《英语文学传统之形成：中世纪英语文学研究》(上、下),北京：社会科学文献出版社,2009。
---：《宫廷爱情诗传统与乔叟的<公爵夫人颂>》,《外国文学研究》6(2003)：40-45。
---：《<坎特伯雷故事>与<十日谈>——薄伽丘的影响和乔叟的成就》,《国外文学》,3(2002)：77-86
---：《乔叟对英国文学的贡献》,《外国文学评论》,4(2001)：85-94。
---：《乔叟的探索与<百鸟议会>的成就》,《四川外语学院学报》,2(2002)：3-6。
---：《<声誉之宫>——乔叟对诗歌创作的探索》,《外国文学研究》,2(2002)：30-35
---：《中世纪浪漫传奇的性质与中古英语亚瑟王传奇之发展》,《四川师范大学学报》(社会科学版),1(2008)：75-81
---：《试论<坎特伯雷故事>的多元与复调》,《外国文学研究》,4(2006)：74-83。
---：《<坎特伯雷故事>的朝圣旅程与基督教传统》,《外国文学》,6(2004)：93-98
---：《乔叟文学思想初探》,《国外文学》,3(2011)：28-36
肖四新：《欧洲文学与基督教》,广州：暨南大学出版社,2013。
肖锋：《巴赫金“微型对话”与“大型对话”》,《俄罗斯文艺》,5(2002)：70-73
谢大卫(加)：《圣书的子民：基督教的特质和文本传统》,李毅译,北京：中国人大出版社,2005。
希尔,弗里德里希(奥地利)著：《欧洲思想史》,赵复三译,桂林：广西师范大学出版社,2007。
亚里士多德：《诗学》,陈中梅译,北京：商务印书馆,1996。
阎国忠：《美是上帝的名字：中世纪神学美学》,上海：上海社会科学院出版社,2003。
杨周翰：《欧洲文学史》,北京：人民文学出版社,1983。
杨慧林、黄晋凯：《欧洲中世纪文学史》,南京：译林出版社,2001。
姚斯,H.R(德)、霍拉勃,R.C(美)：《接受美学与接受理论》,周宁、金元浦译,沈阳：辽宁人民出版社,1987。
伊格尔顿,特里：《当代西方文学理论》,王逢振译.北京：中国社会科学出版社,1998。
张首印：《西方二十世纪文论史》,北京：北京大学出版社,1999。
张杰：《复调小说理论研究》,桂林：漓江出版社,1992。
张金凤：《狂欢和对话：对<坎特伯雷故事>的重新解读》,《四川外语学院学报》,2(2003)：52-55
张京媛编：《新历史主义与文学批评》,北京：北京大学出版社,1993。
张进：《新历史主义与历史诗学》,北京：中国社会科学出版社,2004。
张寅德：《叙述学研究》,北京：中国社会科学出版社,1989。
张开炎：《开放人格——巴赫金》,武汉：长江文艺出版社,2000。
赵一凡等编：《西方文论关键词》,北京：外语教学与研究出版社,2006。
---：《从胡塞尔到德里达：西方文论讲稿》,北京：三联书店,2007。
赵毅衡：《新批评——一种独特的形式主义文论》,北京：中国社会科学出版社,1986。
周春生：《文艺复兴史研究入门》,北京：北京大学出版社,2009。
周启超：《对话与建构》,合肥：安徽文艺出版社,2004。
朱刚编著：《二十世纪西方文论》,北京：北京大学出版社,2006。
朱立元编著：《当代西方文艺理论》,上海：华东师范大学出版社,1997。