English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Folktales are innumerable and there is a myriad of them in all cultures throughout the world. Several attempts have been made at classifying them by scholars like Antti Aarne, Stith Thompson and Hans-Jorg Uther, considering some of the existing versions, theme criteria and their recurring elements. For years these classifications have served the purpose of reference for finding and carrying out different studies in the field of folktales. However, some have questioned their validity. Vladimir Propp set out another form of classification, one arising from the morphology of the folktale and based on the function of the characters. To compare each different approach here it is presented a case study: the structural and morphological analysis of two folktales classified by Aarne, Thompson and Uther within the category of «tales of magic» and referenced as 311B* and 327C.

Las clasificaciones de los cuentos: el catálogo ATU vs. la morfología de Propp. Un caso práctico