APA 6th Edition Frangeš, I. (2004). Ponovno i dodatno o Marulićevu prijevodu Petrarkine kancone Vergine bella. Colloquia Maruliana ..., 13, 89-95. Retrieved from https://hrcak.srce.hr/7998
MLA 8th Edition Frangeš, Ivo. "Ponovno i dodatno o Marulićevu prijevodu Petrarkine kancone Vergine bella." Colloquia Maruliana ..., vol. 13, 2004, pp. 89-95. https://hrcak.srce.hr/7998. Accessed 21 Oct. 2020.
Chicago 17th Edition Frangeš, Ivo. "Ponovno i dodatno o Marulićevu prijevodu Petrarkine kancone Vergine bella." Colloquia Maruliana ... 13 (2004): 89-95. https://hrcak.srce.hr/7998
Harvard Frangeš, I. (2004). 'Ponovno i dodatno o Marulićevu prijevodu Petrarkine kancone Vergine bella', Colloquia Maruliana ..., 13, pp. 89-95. Available at: https://hrcak.srce.hr/7998 (Accessed 21 October 2020)
Vancouver Frangeš I. Ponovno i dodatno o Marulićevu prijevodu Petrarkine kancone Vergine bella. Colloquia Maruliana ... [Internet]. 2004 [cited 2020 October 21];13:89-95. Available from: https://hrcak.srce.hr/7998
IEEE I. Frangeš, "Ponovno i dodatno o Marulićevu prijevodu Petrarkine kancone Vergine bella", Colloquia Maruliana ..., vol.13, pp. 89-95, 2004. [Online]. Available: https://hrcak.srce.hr/7998. [Accessed: 21 October 2020]
Abstracts Marulić’s Latin version of Petrarch’s canzone Vergine bella (created about 1510-1511, printed in the Evangelistary of 1516) is important as a testimony to Marulić’s knowledge of his great poetic model and his skill in turning his celebrated poem into the eminent medium of the Latin elegiac couplet. In addition to this, it is to this poem that the short but very interesting dedication to Jerolim Papalić is appended; in this Marulić puts forward his views about translation.
A detailed comparison of the translated version and the original has already been made by Francesco Lo Parco, long ago in 1931; attention was paid in this work to Marulić’s poetic sources. Since that time, practically nothing has been written about this important document of the Croatian reception of Petrarch.
Nevertheless, the importance of this poetic encounter and the richness of the translation or version do suggest the need for further interpretation. Although Marulić’s way of translating can hardly be reconciled with our current concept of transmission of material from one language to another, the contemporary reader cannot, in spite of all Marul’s amplifications and deviations, refrain from admit-ting that Petrarch’s canzone and Marulić’s translation are the encounter of two geniuses, and that the Latin version is in many respects quite up to the original: those areas in which it deviates do not diminish the value of Marulić’s work; on the contrary, taken as a whole, the translation does honour to Marulić and the Croatian tradition of Latinism.