1994
DOI: 10.2307/469373
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Intertextuality vs. Hypertextuality

Abstract: JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.. The Johns Hopkins University Press is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to New Literary History.

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1

Citation Types

0
8
0
2

Year Published

2002
2002
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
9
1

Relationship

0
10

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 35 publications
(10 citation statements)
references
References 0 publications
0
8
0
2
Order By: Relevance
“…According to Riffaterre [11] intertextuality can explain what a text cannot say. The reader must hypothesize and look for the missing link in the text.…”
Section: Isaiah's Social Criticism In Rendra's Poemsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…According to Riffaterre [11] intertextuality can explain what a text cannot say. The reader must hypothesize and look for the missing link in the text.…”
Section: Isaiah's Social Criticism In Rendra's Poemsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The tendency to “read meaning into everything” would however not be possible without writing. Hyperhermeneutics is formed through a certain kind of hypertextuality, a multiplication of texts that builds “an endless series of imagined connections” (Riffaterre 1994:780). Whereas hyperhermeneutics is an obsessive decoding, political hypertextuality is an obsessive encoding.…”
Section: Hyperhermeneutics and Hypertextualitymentioning
confidence: 99%
“…), it is a reduction and intensification of the works of written literature and the oral tradition of myths, stock characters or social codes of conduct. As a concept, intertextuality has been defined by various theorists such as Sassure (1966), Bakhtin (1981), Barthes (2001), Kristeva (1980), Riffaterre (1994), Genette (2011) and so on and despite having their own intertextual theories, theorists and practitioners come to the common point that "no text exists own its own, and all texts are in a relationship with other texts". The more present day theoreticians as both originators and contributors such as Umberto Eco, Harold Bloom, Laurent Jenny, and so on who have an influence in the creation of intertextuality as a critical theory will be kept out of the scope of this study due to the limited length of the study and to keep the focus of the paper on the practical study on Anti-proverbs known as humorous structures from the perspective of intertextuality.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%