Where does intertexuality depart from plagiarism in a literary analysis context?
Thanks for your comments!
One of the strongest argument could be through " The Death of an Author" by Roland Barthes. He questions the authors intention and the source of the idea as the source was always a borrowed one. Hence intertextuality doesnot accommodate plagiarism.
Thanks, Peter Aburvan . I understand Barthe's concept of The Death of the Author as being a metaphoric death. Even though ideas are circulated, mixed, modified and changed there still exists (an) originator(s). Thinking, and consequently writing, has become more like a collective process, especially in today's digital world.
You can also add the flood myth theories as a collective archetype where plagiarism cannot play a role.
A great addition! So we can presume that intertexuality, or at least accidental intertexuality, drives on Collective Consciousness.
I have touched upon intertextuality within a frame of Jacques Derrida's theory of deconstruction of human expression leading inevitably to multiple and complex removed productions from the original which according to such a view does not exist at all.
" It’s Alive”: Implications of the Constant Transformation of English." The International Journal of Communication and Linguistic Studies, 2018, 15: 4, 14-32.
Dear Agnieszka Will geb. Gronek, I have been examining two literary texts, two poems to be more precise; one by a British poet the other by an Arab.
The two poems show considerable intertexualities whether in regard to theme, imagery or vocabulary.
We know that intertextuality could be intentional or accidental (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intertextuality#Plagiarism). Hence, the question is how to decide whether the author has been plagiarizing or resorting to intertextuality. Peter Aburvan has highlighted the author's intentions as a criterion for setting the boundary between the two. However, Peter, for outside readers or critics it is never easy to find out an author's intention. The issue has ethical implications, in addition to the wonder about the source from which these "shared" aspects of writing come from. See for example (https://www.thoughtco.com/collective-consciousness-definition-3026118).
I hope this clarifies the question!
Orchida Ismail , excuse my question, what is it that "does not exist at all"?
Agnieszka Will geb. Gronek, sure!
There is always the possibility that the latter poet knew the works of the former. Though around 40 years separated them. Your suggestion about examining their other works is interesting. Thanks!
Muthana,
Most of the time plagiarism does not achieve fusion with the rest of the text (plagiarism is usually embedded in the text, not fused). Intertextuality needs fusion with the additional context that will always impact the core idea with subtleties that are not found in plagiarized text.
Another crucial point is on the language of each of the works. Are they in the same language? Also, what time periods are each of them? Are they translated by the same person? Just want to eliminate the possibility of translation bias.
Muthana Makki Mohammedali I was thinking of deconstructive activity, which turns the text in traces of more text and challenges the very idea of "being" and allowing interpretation to question the validity of an origin :
… the joyous affirmation of the play of the world and of the innocence of becoming, the affirmation of a world of signs without fault, without truth, and without origin which is offered to an active interpretation. (Derrida, 1978, pp. 278-293)
- Badges
- Science topic
- Similar topics
- Linguistics
- Composition Studies
- Writing