| 324,11 (zu den werkspezifischen Angaben) | [Zu 324,10] |
|
Adaptation: Mergell 1943 102 [324,11-324,14]
Antikonie: Steppich 2000 187 [320,22-324,30] Charakterisierung: Ringeler 2000 150 [324,11-324,21] Erzähltechnik: Parshall 1981 249 Anm. 7 [322,1-325,30], Urscheler 2002 99 [324,3-324,30], 119 [324,3-324,30] ethischer Wortschatz: Heckel, H. 1939 27 [324,11-324,12] Interpretation: Huth 1972 404 [185,21-815,26], Kratz, H. 1973a 276 [323,1-325,16] Juristisches: Fehr 1931 131 [324,10-324,18] Lesarten: Jones, W. 1990 40 [324,10-324,14] Namen: McFarland 2004 190 [323,1-324,30] Quellen - Chrétien: Lichtenstein 1897 54 [324,11-324,18], Rachbauer 1934 211 [324,11-324,18], 225 [324,11-324,13], Rachbauer 1970 211 [324,11-324,18], 225 [324,11-324,13], Rachbauer 1980 211 [324,11-324,18], 225 [324,11-324,13] Rache: Zacharias 1961/62 180 [324,11-324,18], Möbius 1993 235, Greenfield 1994 61 [324,11-324,14], Ehrismann, O. 1995 155 [324,11-324,30], Holzhauer 1997 330-31 [324,11-324,18] Reim: Zwierzina 1900a 22 Anm. 1 [324,11-324,12] Rezeption (sekundär - Mittelalter): Nyholm 1964 162 [324,11-325,10], Remakel 1995 175 [320,5-324,30] Stil: Weber, G. 1928 256 Anm. 408 [324,6-324,12], Laserstein 1967 32 [153,14-372,18] Überlieferung: Hartl 1928 XIII [324,11-324,12], Hofstätter 1951 78 [324,5-325,10], Bonath und Lomnitzer 1989 111 [323,20-324,22], 126 [323,26-324,30], 128 [324,5-325,10] Verwandtschaftsverhältnisse: Lichtenstein 1897 69, Jones, W. 1990 17, 39, [324,10-324,14], 40, [324,10-324,14], Sutter 2003 90 [324,11-324,13], 203 [324,11-324,14] Wortschatz: Ehrismann, O. 1995 155 [324,11-324,30], Okken 1995a 284 [324,11-324,30] | |
| [Zu 324,12] | |