താൾ:13E3287.pdf/30

വിക്കിഗ്രന്ഥശാല സംരംഭത്തിൽ നിന്ന്
Jump to navigation Jump to search
ഈ താളിൽ തെറ്റുതിരുത്തൽ വായന നടന്നിരിക്കുന്നു


itel compares similar texts and forms in Indo-European epics. He shows
five points which can be compared: "The first, and the widely
accepted...starting point for further inquiry, was the recognition of mythic
traits concerning trifunctional groups of Indo-European deities transposed
onto the Pandavas and Draupadi...Second, varying arguments have been
presented that the central drama of the epic involves the transposition of an
Indo-European eschatological myth into heroic terms...Third, the main
narrative of the epic itself has been shown to have striking correspondences
with other Indo-European epic (as distinct from mythic) traditions, most
notable with the Norse Battle of Bravellir...Fourth the Epic includes
independent tales outside its main narrative that seems to be the Indian
variants (Yayati, Vasu Uparicara, Madhavi) of Indo-European
prototypes...And fifth, certain singular episodes within the larger main
narrative seem to be the Indian variants of heroic gestures, here involving
not primal kings but warriors and champions".14

Hiltebeitel shows the results of the form-critical method. In order
to get to know how this methods came into the sight of modern text
interpretation we have to explain its development from the beginning till
today.

In the form-critical method Klaus Koch brought a breakthrough.
The old texts were no longer investigated only philologically and histori-
cally, but they were also understood in their context and then compared
with similar passages in related texts and literature. Formerly in the
literary-critical method the aim had been to go deeper and deeper into the
details of a word, of an expression or of a passage of a narration. Now the
form -critical methods looked at an expession or a text from its Sitz im
Leben (setting in life).

Before we proceed any further, I think I should outline the history
of this method as a critical tool.

In his book the Form-Critical Method, Klaus Koch starts with the
question: What is form criticism?15 and gives the answer: "The German word Formgeschichte appears as a technical term for the first time in 1919
in the book title Die Formgeschichte des Evangeliums by M. Dibelius, and
quickly established itself as the name of a recognised method of biblical
exegesis. Dibelius was inspired by Herman Gunkel, who has introduced
form-critical methods of biblical scholarship as much as twenty years
earlier, although under the name of Gattungsforschung (research into
literary types), or Literaturgeschichte (history of literature). Gunkel is the
real pioneer of this branch of literary research.'16

As preliminary facts Koch points out that "Everything which is
written or printed falls into literary types. The spoken word also, whether

28

"https://ml.wikisource.org/w/index.php?title=താൾ:13E3287.pdf/30&oldid=201673" എന്ന താളിൽനിന്ന് ശേഖരിച്ചത്