Bibliography
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 05 March 2016
- Type
- Chapter
- Information
- Virgil's Eclogues and the Art of FictionA Study of the Poetic Imagination, pp. 162 - 172Publisher: Cambridge University PressPrint publication year: 2016
References
Acél, Z. (2007) “Der Orpheus des Epitaphios Bionos in den Werken von Vergil und Ovid,” Acta Antiqua Academiae Scientiarum Hungaricae 47: 349–68.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Altieri, C. (2001) “Taking lyrics literally: teaching poetry in a prose culture,” New Literary History 32: 259–81.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Anagnostou-Laoutides, E. and Konstan, D. (2008) “Daphnis and Aphrodite: a love affair in Theocritus ‘Idyll’ 1,” AJPh 129: 497–527.Google Scholar
Anderson, W. (1986) “The theory and practice of poetic arrangement from Vergil to Ovid,” in Poems in Their Place: The Intertextuality and Order of Poetic Collections, ed. Fraistat, N.. Chapel Hill and London: 44–65.Google Scholar
Arnold, B. (1994) “The literary experience of Vergil’s fourth Eclogue,” CJ 90: 143–60.Google Scholar
Baier, T. (2003) “Vergils dichterische Selbstbestimmung in der sechsten Ekloge,” Pan 21: 165–76.Google Scholar
Barchiesi, A. (1997) “Virgilian narrative: ecphrasis,” in The Cambridge Companion to Virgil, ed. Martindale, C.. Cambridge: 271–81.Google Scholar
Barthes, R. (1989) “The death of the author,” in The Rustle of Language, trans. Howard, R.. Berkeley: 49–55.Google Scholar
Baumbach, M. (2001) “Dichterwettstrieit als Liebeswerbung in Vergils 5. Ekloge,” Philologus 145: 108–20.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Berger, H. (1984) “The origins of bucolic representation: disenchantment and revision in Theocritus’ seventh Idyll,” ClAnt 3: 1–39.Google Scholar
Bernsdorf, H. (2006) “The idea of bucolic in the imitators of Theocritus, 3rd–1st century BC,” in Brill’s Companion to Greek and Latin Pastoral, eds. Fantuzzi, M. and Papanghelis, T.. Leiden: 167–207.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Binder, G. (1983) “Lied der Parzen zur Geburt Octavians: Vergils vierte Ekloge,” Gymnasium 90: 102–22.Google Scholar
Bing, P. (1991) “The bios-tradition and poets’ lives in Hellenistic poetry,” in Nomodeiktes: Greek Studies in Honor of Martin Ostwald, eds. Rosen, R. and Farrell, J.. Ann Arbor, Mich.: 619–31.Google Scholar
Bowie, E. L. (1985) “Theocritus’ seventh Idyll, Philetas, and Longus,” CQ 35: 67–91.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Boyle, A. J. (1986) The Chaonian Dove: Studies in the Eclogues, Georgics, and Aeneid of Virgil. Leiden.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Breed, B. W. (2006a) Pastoral Inscriptions: Reading and Writing Virgil’s Eclogues. London.Google Scholar
Breed, B. W. (2006b) “Time and textuality in the book of the Eclogues,” in Brill’s Companion to Greek and Latin Pastoral, eds. Fantuzzi, M. and Papanghelis, T.. Leiden: 333–67.Google Scholar
Buchheit, V. (1972) Der Anspruch des Dichters in Vergils Georgika: Dichtertum und Heilsweg. Darmstadt.Google Scholar
Canter, H. V. (1930) “The figure of adynaton in Greek and Latin poetry,” AJPh 51: 32–41.Google Scholar
Clauss, J. J. (2002/03) “Large and Illyrical waters in Vergil’s eighth Eclogue,” Hermathena 173–74:165–73.Google Scholar
Connolly, J. (2001) “Picture Arcadia: the politics of representation in Vergil’s Eclogues,” Vergilius 47: 80–116.Google Scholar
Culler, J. (1981) The Pursuit of Signs: Semiotics, Literature, Deconstruction. Ithaca, N.Y.Google Scholar
Dick, B. F. (1968) “Ancient pastoral and the pathetic fallacy,” Comparative Literature 20: 27–44.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Du Quesnay, I. M. Le M. (1976/77) “Virgil’s fifth Eclogue: the song of Mopsus and the new Daphnis,” PVS 16: 18–41.Google Scholar
Du Quesnay, I. M. Le M. (1979) “From Polyphemus to Corydon,” in Creative Imitation and Latin Literature, eds. West, D. and Woodman, T.. Cambridge: 35–69.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Du Quesnay, I. M. Le M. (1981) “Vergil’s first Eclogue,” in Papers of the Liverpool Latin Seminar, ed. Cairns, F.. Liverpool: 29–182.Google Scholar
Drew, D. L. (1922) “Virgil’s fifth Eclogue: a defence of the Julius Caesar-Daphnis theory,” CQ: 57–64.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fantazzi, C. and Querbach, C. W. (1985) “Sound and substance: a reading of Virgil’s seventh Eclogue,” Phoenix 39: 355–67.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fantuzzi, M. and Hunter, R. (eds.) (2004) Tradition and Innovation in Hellenistic Poetry. Cambridge.Google Scholar
Fantuzzi, M. and Papanghelis, T. (eds.) (2006) Brill’s Companion to Greek and Latin Pastoral. Leiden.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Faraone, C. A. (1989) “Clay hardens and wax melts: magical role-reversal in Vergil’s eighth Eclogue,” CPh 84: 294–300.Google Scholar
Farrell, J. (1992) “Literary allusion and cultural poetics in Vergil’s third Eclogue,” Vergilius 38: 64–71.Google Scholar
Feeney, D. C. (1991) The Gods in Epic: Poets and Critics of the Classical Tradition. Oxford.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Feeney, D. C. (1993) “Towards an account of the ancient world’s concepts of fictive belief,” in Lies and Fiction in the Ancient World, eds. Gill, C. and Wiseman, T. P.. Austin, Tex.: 230–44.Google Scholar
Foucault, M. (1980) Language, Counter-memory, Practice: Selected Essays and Interviews, ed. and trans. Bouchard, D. F. and Simon, S.. Ithaca, N.Y.Google Scholar
Fowler, A (1982) Kinds of Literature: An Introduction to the Theory of Genres and Modes. Cambridge, Mass.Google Scholar
Fowler, D. P. (1996) “Even better than the real thing: a tale of two cities,” in Art and Text in Roman Culture, ed. Elsner, J.. Cambridge: 57–74.Google Scholar
Fraistat, N. (ed.) (1986) Poems in Their Place: The Intertextuality and Order of Poetic Collections. Chapel Hill and London.Google Scholar
Fredericksmeyer, E. A. (1966) “Octavian and the unity of Virgil’s first Eclogue,” Hermes 94: 208–17.Google Scholar
Gale, M. (2013) “Virgil’s Caesar: intertextuality and ideology,” in Augustan Poetry and the Roman Republic, eds. Farrell, J. and Nelis, D.. Oxford: 278–96.Google Scholar
Galinsky, G. K. (1965) “Virgil’s second Eclogue: its theme and relation to the Eclogue Book,” C&M 26: 161–91.Google Scholar
Gauly, B. M. (1990) Liebeserfahrungen. Zur Rolle des elegischen Ich in Ovids Amores. Frankfurt am Main.Google Scholar
Genette, G. (1980) Narrative Discourse: An Essay on Method, trans. Lewin, J. E.. Ithaca, N.Y.Google Scholar
Gill, C. and Wiseman, T. P. (eds.) (1993) Lies and Fiction in the Ancient World. Austin, Tex.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Goldhill, S. (1991) The Poet’s Voice: Essays on Poetics and Greek Literature. Cambridge.Google Scholar
Griffin, J. (2008) “The fourth Georgic, Virgil, and Rome,” in Virgil. Georgics, ed. Volk, K.. Oxford: 225–43.Google Scholar
Gurval, R. A. (1997) “Caesar’s comet: the politics and poetics of an Augustan myth,” MAAR 42: 39–72.Google Scholar
Gutzwiller, K. (1991) Theocritus’ Pastoral Analogies: The Formation of a Genre. Madison, Wisc.Google Scholar
Gutzwiller, K. (1996) “The evidence for Theocritean poetry books,” in Theocritus, eds. Harder, M., Regtuit, R. and Wakker, G.. Groningen: 119–48.Google Scholar
Habinek, T. (2005) The World of Roman Song: From Ritualized Speech to Social Order. Baltimore.Google Scholar
Halliwell, S. (2002) The Aesthetics of Mimesis: Ancient Texts and Modern Problems. Princeton, N.J.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hardie, P. (2006) “Cultural and historical narratives in Virgil’s Eclogues and Lucretius,” in Brill’s Companion to Greek and Latin Pastoral, eds. Fantuzzi, M. and Papanghelis, T.. Leiden: 396–402.Google Scholar
Heffernan, J. (1993) Museum of Words: The Poetics of Ekphrasis from Homer to Ashbery. Chicago and London.Google Scholar
Henderson, J. (1998b) “Virgil’s third Eclogue: how do you keep an idiot in suspense?,” CQ 48: 213–28.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Henkel, J. H. (2009) Writing Poems on Trees: Genre and Metapoetics in Vergil’s Eclogues and Georgics. Dissertation, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill.Google Scholar
Herrmann, L. (1930) Les masques et les visages dans les Bucoliques de Virgile. Brussels.Google Scholar
Hinds, S. (1998) Allusion and Intertext: Dynamics of Appropriation in Roman Poetry. Cambridge.Google Scholar
Hubbard, T. K. (1998) The Pipes of Pan: Intertextuality and Literary Filiation in the Pastoral Tradition from Theocritus to Milton. Ann Arbor, Mich.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hunter, R. (2002) “The sense of an author: Theocritus and [Theocritus],” in The Classical Commentary: Histories, Practices, Theories, eds. Gibson, R., & Kraus, C.. Leiden.Google Scholar
Hunter, R. (2006a) The Shadow of Callimachus: Studies in the Reception of Hellenistic Poetry at Rome. Cambridge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hunter, R. (2006b) “Virgil’s Ecl. 1 and the origins of pastoral,” in Brill’s Companion to Greek and Latin Pastoral, eds. Fantuzzi, M. and Papanghelis, T.. Leiden: 263–73.Google Scholar
Iser, W. (1978) The Act of Reading: A Theory of Aesthetic Response. Baltimore.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Johnson, W. R. (1982) The Idea of Lyric: Lyric Modes in Ancient and Modern Poetry. Berkeley.Google Scholar
Johnson, W. R. (1990) “Messalla’s birthday: the politics of pastoral,” Arethusa 23: 95–114.Google Scholar
Kania, R. (forthcoming) “Unbounded views: incomplete ekphrasis in Virgil,” Ramus.Google Scholar
Katz, J. T. and Volk, K. (2006) “Erotic hardening and softening in Vergil’s eighth Eclogue,” CQ 56: 169–74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kennedy, D. F. (1987) “Arcades ambo: Virgil, Gallus, and Arcadia,” Hermathena 143: 47–59.Google Scholar
Korenjak, M. (2003) “Tityri sub persona: Der antike Biographismus und die bukolische Tradition,” A&A 49: 58–79.Google Scholar
Krevans, N. (1983) “Geography and the literary tradition in Theocritus 7,” TAPhA 113: 201–20.Google Scholar
Krevans, N. (1984) The Poet as Editor. Callimachus, Virgil, Horace, Propertius and the Development of the Poetic Book. Princeton, N.J.Google Scholar
Kripke, S. (1963) “Semantical considerations on modal logic,” Acta Philosophica Fennica 16: 83–94.Google Scholar
Laird, A. (1993) “Sounding out ecphrasis: art and text in Catullus 64,” JRS 83: 18–30.Google Scholar
Laird, A. (1999) Powers of Expression, Expressions of Power: Speech Presentation and Latin Literature. Oxford.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lefevre, E. (2000) “Catulls Parzenlied und Vergils vierte Ekloge,” Philologus 144: 62–80.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lieberg, G. (1982) Poeta Creator: Studien zu einer Figur der antiken Dichtung. Amsterdam.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Liebert, R. S. (2004) “Fiction and identity in Theocritus” (unpublished seminar paper).Google Scholar
Lipka, M. (2002) “Notes on fagus in Vergil’s Eclogues,” Philologus 146: 133–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lowrie, M. (2009) Writing, Performance, and Authority in Augustan Rome. Oxford.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Macdonald, J. (2005) “Structure and allusion in Idyll 2 and Eclogue 8,” Vergilius 51: 12–32.Google Scholar
Manakidou, F. P. (1993) Beschreibung von Kunstwerken in der hellenistichen Dichtung. Stuttgart.Google Scholar
Manakidou, F. P. (1996) “Epitaphios Adonidos and Epitaphios Bionos: remarks on their generic form and content,” MD 37: 27–58.Google Scholar
Mankin, D. (1988) “The addressee of Virgil’s eighth Eclogue. A reconsideration,” Hermes 116: 63–76.Google Scholar
Martindale, C. (ed.) (2005) Latin Poetry and the Judgment of Taste: An Essay in Aesthetics. Oxford.Google Scholar
Maury, P. (1944) “Le secret de Virgile et l’architecture des Bucoliques,” Lettres d’Humanité 3: 71–147.Google Scholar
Mette, H. J. (1973) “Vergil, Bucol. 4. Ein Beispiel “generischer” Interpretation,” RhM 116: 71–8.Google Scholar
Miner, E. (1986) “Some issues for the study of integrated collections,” in Poems in Their Place: The Intertextuality and Order of Poetic Collections, ed. Fraistat, N.. Chapel Hill and London: 18–43.Google Scholar
Moles, J. L. (1993) “Truth and untruth in Herodotus and Thucydides,” in Lies and Fiction in the Ancient World, eds. Gill, C. and Wiseman, T. P.. Austin, Tex.: 88–121.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Moran, R. (1994) “The expression of feeling in imagination,” The Philosophical Review 103: 75–106.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Most, G. W. (1993) “The languages of poetry,” New Literary History 24: 545–62.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nauta, R. (2006) “Panegyric in Virgil’s Bucolics,” in Brill’s Companion to Greek and Latin Pastoral, eds. Fantuzzi, M. and Papanghelis, T.. Leiden: 301–32.Google Scholar
Nisbet, R. G. M. (1978) “Virgil’s fourth Eclogue: easterners and westerners,” BICS 25: 59–78.Google Scholar
Nisbet, R. G. M. (1979) “The Design of Virgil’s Bucolics by J. Van Sickle (review),” JRS 69: 231.Google Scholar
Pandey, N. (2013) “Caesar’s comet, the Julian star, and the invention of Augustus,” TAPhA 143: 405–49.Google Scholar
Papanghelis, T. (1997) “Winning on points: about the singing-match in Virgil’s seventh Eclogue,” in Studies in Latin Literature and Roman History 8, ed. Deroux, C.. Brussels: 144–57.Google Scholar
Papanghelis, T. (1999) “Love in Virgil’s Eclogues,” in Amor, Roma: Love and Latin Literature, eds. Braund, S. M. and Mayer, R.. Cambridge: 44–59.Google Scholar
Papanghelis, T. (2006) “Friends, foes, frames and fragments: textuality in Virgil’s Eclogues,” in Brill’s Companion to Greek and Latin Pastoral, eds. Fantuzzi, M. and Papanghelis, T.. Leiden: 368–402.Google Scholar
Parker, H. N. (1992) “Fish in trees and tie-dyed sheep: a function of the surreal in Roman poetry,” Arethusa 25: 293–323.Google Scholar
Paschalis, M. (1995a) “Glukeron stoma: erotic Homer in the Lament for Bion,” MD 34: 179–85.Google Scholar
Paschalis, M. (1995b) “Vergil’s sixth Eclogue and the Lament for Bion,” AJPh 116: 617–21.Google Scholar
Peirano, I. (2009) “Mutati artus: Scylla, Philomela, and the end of Silenus’ song in Virgil Eclogue 6,” CQ 59: 187–95.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Perkell, C. G. (1996) “The ‘dying Gallus’ and the design of Eclogue 10,” CPh 91: 128–40.Google Scholar
Perkell, C. G. (2001) “Vergil reading his twentieth-century readers: a study of Eclogue 9,” Vergilius 47: 64–88.Google Scholar
Perkell, C. G. (2002) “The golden age and its contradictions in the poetry of Vergil,” Vergilius 48: 3–39.Google Scholar
Perutelli, A. (1995) “Bucolics,” in A Companion to the Study of Virgil, ed. Horsfall, N.. New York: 27–62.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pippin, R. (2010) “In defense of naïve readings,” New York Times, October 10. http://opinionator.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/10/10/in-defense-of-naive-reading/Google Scholar
Pretagostini, R. (1992) “Tracce di poesia orale nei carmi di Teocrito,” Aevum 5: 67–87.Google Scholar
Putnam, M. C. J. (1975) “Virgil’s first Eclogue: poetics of enclosure,” Ramus 4: 163–86.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Putnam, M. C. J. (1979) Virgil’s Poem of the Earth: Studies in the Georgics. Princeton, N.J.Google Scholar
Putnam, M. C. J. (1998) Virgil’s Epic Designs: Ekphrasis in the Aeneid. New Haven, Conn.Google Scholar
Ramsey, J. T. and Licht, A. L. (1997) The Comet of 44 B.C. and Caesar’s Funeral Games. Atlanta.Google Scholar
Reed, J. D. (2006) “Continuity and change in Greek bucolic between Theocritus and Virgil,” in Brill’s Companion to Greek and Latin Pastoral, eds. Fantuzzi, M. and Papanghelis, T.. Leiden: 209–34.Google Scholar
Rosen, R. M. and Farrell, J. (1986) “Acontius, Milanion, and Gallus: Vergil, Ecl. 10.52–61,” TAPhA 116: 241–54.Google Scholar
Rosenmeyer, T. (1969) The Green Cabinet: Theocritus and the European Pastoral Lyric. Berkeley.Google Scholar
Ross, D. O. (1975) Backgrounds to Augustan Poetry: Gallus, Elegy, and Rome. Cambridge.Google Scholar
Rumpf, L. (1996) Extremus Labor: Vergils 10. Ekloge und die Poetik der Bucolica. Göttingen.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rumpf, L. (1999) “Bukolische Nomina bei Vergil und Theokrit: Zur poetischen Technik des Eklogenbuchs,” RhM 142: 157–75.Google Scholar
Rumpf, L. (2008) “Bucolic nomina in Virgil and Theocritus: on the poetic technique of Virgil’s Eclogues,” in Virgil. Eclogues, ed. Volk, K.. Oxford: 64–78.Google Scholar
Sallmann, K. (1998) “Wer singt Damons Lied?: noch einmal zu Vergils 8. Ekloge,” in Candide iudex: Beiträge zur augusteischen Dichtung, ed. Radke, A. E.. Stuttgart: 275–81.Google Scholar
Saunders, T. (2008) Bucolic Ecology: Virgil’s Eclogues and the Environmental Literary Tradition. London.Google Scholar
Schmidt, E. A. (1987) Bukolische Leidenschaft, oder, Über antike Hirtenpoesie. Frankfurt am Main.Google Scholar
Schmidt, E. A. (2008) “Arcadia: modern occident and classical antiquity,” in Virgil. Eclogues, ed. Volk, K.. Oxford: 16–47.Google Scholar
Schultz, C. E. (2003) “Latet anguis in herba: a reading of Vergil’s third Eclogue,” AJPh 124: 199–224.Google Scholar
Schwindt, J. P. (2013) “The philology of history: how and what Augustan literature remembers,” in Augustan Poetry and the Roman Republic, eds. Farrell, J. and Nelis, D.. Oxford: 40–56.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Segal, C. (1987) “Alphesiboeus’ song and Simaetha’s magic: Virgil’s eighth Eclogue and Theocritus’ second Idyll,” GB 14: 167–85.Google Scholar
Seng, H. (1999) Vergils Eklogenbuch: Aufbau, Chronologie und Zahlenverhältnisse. Hildesheim.Google Scholar
Serrao, G. (1977) “La poesia bucolica: realità campestre e stilizzazione letteraria,” QUCC 19: 73–109.Google Scholar
Smith, P. L. (1980) “The design of Virgil’s bucolics by John van Sickle (review),” Phoenix 34: 95–7.Google Scholar
Snell, B. (1953) The Discovery of the Mind: The Greek Origins of European Thought, trans. Rosenmeyer, T.. Oxford.Google Scholar
Starr, R. J. (1995) “Virgil’s seventh Eclogue and its readers: biographical allegory as an interpretive strategy in antiquity and late antiquity,” CPh 90: 129–38.Google Scholar
Theodorakopoulos, E. (1997) “Closure: the book of Virgil,” in The Cambridge Companion to Virgil, ed. Martindale, C.. Cambridge: 155–65.Google Scholar
Thibodeau, P. (2006) “The addressee of Vergil’s eighth Eclogue,” CQ 56.2: 618–23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Thomas, J. (2000) “L’ Otium dans les Bucoliques: temps suspendu et temps de l’éclair,” Euphrosyne 28: 213–20.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Thomas, R. F. (1999) Reading Virgil and His Texts: Studies in Intertextuality. Ann Arbor, Mich.Google Scholar
Tracy, S. (2003) “Palaemon’s Indecision,” in Essays in Honor of Michael C. J. Putnam on the Occasion of His 70th Birthday, eds. Thibodeau, P. and Haskell, H.. Afton, Minn.Google Scholar
Trimble, G. (2013) “Catullus 64 and the prophetic voice in Virgil’s fourth Eclogue,” in Augustan Poetry and the Roman Republic, eds. Farrell, J. and Nelis, D.. Oxford: 263–77.Google Scholar
Van Sickle, J. (1976) “Theocritus and the development of the conception of bucolic genre,” Ramus 5: 18–44.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Van Sickle, J. (1980) “The book-roll and some conventions of the poetic book,” Arethusa 13: 5–42.Google Scholar
Van Sickle, J. (1984) “How do we read ancient texts: codes and critics in Virgil, Eclogues,” MD 13: 107–28.Google Scholar
Van Sickle, J. (2000) “Virgil vs. Cicero, Lucretius, Theocritus, Callimachus, Plato, and Homer: two programmatic plots in the first Bucolic,” Vergilius 46: 21–58.Google Scholar
Van Sickle, J. (2004) “Virgil Bucolics 1.1–2 and interpretive tradition: a Latin (Roman) program for a Greek genre,” CPh 99: 336–53.Google Scholar
Volk, K. (2002) The Poetics of Latin Didactic: Lucretius, Vergil, Ovid, Manilius. Oxford.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wilamowitz-Möllendorff, U. (1906) Die Textgeschichte der griechischen Bukoliker. Berlin.Google Scholar
Williams, G. (1974) “A version of pastoral,” in Quality and Pleasure in Latin Poetry, eds. Woodman, A. J. and West, D.. Cambridge: 31–46.Google Scholar
Wright, J. R. G. (1983) “Virgil’s pastoral programme: Theocritus, Callimachus and Eclogue 1,” PCPhS 209: 107–160.Google Scholar
Wyke, M. (1995) “Taking the woman’s part: engendering Roman love elegy,” in Roman Literature and Ideology: Ramus Essays for J.P. Sullivan, ed. Boyle, A. J.. Bendigo: 110–28.Google Scholar
Zanker, G. (1985) “A Hesiodic reminiscence in Virgil, E. 9.11–13,” CQ 35: 235–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zeitlin, F. (1996) Playing the Other: Gender and Society in Classical Greek Literature. Chicago.Google Scholar
Ziolwkowski, J. M. and Putnam, M. C. J. (eds.) (2008) The Virgilian Tradition: The First Fifteen Hundred Years. New Haven, Conn.Google Scholar
Zunshine, L. (2006) Why We Read Fiction: Theory of Mind and the Novel. Columbus, Ohio.Google Scholar