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 Plus monthly

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Free Plan

In the study of Welsh translational texts instances of multiple translations are not rare (cf. Sims-Williams 2011, Sims-Williams in press on Historia Regum Brittaniae). Another example are Welsh versions of Visio Sancti Pauli. According to Williams 1962 three independent translations of the Latin text exist. Given the high fluidity degree of the Latin text (cf. Dwyer 2004, Jiroušková 2006) it is not surprising that these three versions have different sources. The texts in the Book of the Anchorite of Llanddewi Brefi/Peniarth 3/Peniarth 14/Peniarth 15/Peniarth 27 and in Llanstephan 4 are based on a Latin text of Silverstein’s redaction IV (Williams 1962: 123), their sources belonging to different subgroups between this redaction, as the paper will show. Texts in Shrewsbury 11/Peniarth 32/(Y Llyfr Teg)/Peniarth 50 (Y Cwta Cyfarwydd)/NLW MS. 5267/Peniarth 267 are based on Silverstein’s redaction I. This paper will show how a comparison between multiple translations, even under consideration of slightly differing sources, can provide us with new insights into the work of Welsh translators.

Multiple Versions of Breuddwyd Pawl as a Source to Study the Work of Welsh Translators