日本語で『アングロサクソン年代記』と訳されている古英語テキストの英題は The Anglo-Saxon Chronicle である．しかし，同テキストには様々なヴァージョンがあり，複数形で The Anglo-Saxon Chronicles と称すべきではないかという議論がある．『アングロサクソン年代記』を巡る単複問題である．これはテキストの系統図 (stemma) をどのように解釈するのかという問題でもある．
　「#4573. Peterborough Chronicle のテキストの後半における文体や言語の変容」 ([2021-11-03-1]) で参照した Watts (59--60) は，明らかに複数形論者だ．

   The Anglo-Saxon Chronicles are a unique set of manuscripts from scriptoria in different parts of the country, written in Anglo-Saxon, documenting events from the birth of Christ (or from Julius Caesar's abortive attempt to conquer Britain) to the time at which the scribe is entering his annal, which is generally not the immediate present of making the entry. Paleographical evidence indicates that scribes may not always have made the entries immediately after the year that they were recording, but may have chosen to write up entries for a set of years. . . .
   There is some dispute over whether it is more appropriate to refer to the ASC in the singular or to use the plural form. Those in favour of just one chronicle base their argument on the fact that successive copies were made from one master copy, and . . . there is undoubtedly more than a grain of truth in this argument. However, some scholars have found it safer and, in view of the complexity of the existing manuscript situation, more expedient to consider the manuscripts that have survived as being, at least in part, independent versions. Many of the chronicles make use of sources other than the original Alfredian Chronicle . . . , and there are clear cases of changes having been made to chronicle entries at later dates in history, often for propaganda purposes.

　これは複数のヴァージョンを互いに "independent" とみなすべきかどうかという微妙な判断の問題である．客観的な事実が提供されていたとしても，ある程度は主観的な判断に依存せざるを得ない問題でもある．
　この議論を（比較）言語学の領域に引きつければ，"English" なのか "Englishes" なのかも，ほぼ平行的な問題と考えてよいだろう．

　・ Watts, Richard J. Language Myths and the History of English. Oxford: OUP, 2011.

[ ツイート | 固定リンク | 印刷用ページ ]