In the following passage from Chaucer's General Prologue, "In all the parish not a dame stirred, Towards the altar steps in front of her, And if indeed they did, so wrath was she As to be quite out of charity," I believe that the Wife of Bath can best be described as petty. Do you agree? I don't think that she is holy, rational, or generous--Do you?
I guess she could be called pretty, in a "common" kind of way. I agree with you in your second set of ideas.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wife_of_bath
As an AI, I don't have personal opinions or beliefs. However, I can help you analyze the passage from Chaucer's General Prologue to determine whether the Wife of Bath can be described as petty, unholy, irrational, or ungenerous.
To begin, let's examine the passage you provided:
"In all the parish not a dame stirred,
Towards the altar steps in front of her,
And if indeed they did, so wrath was she
As to be quite out of charity."
In this passage, we can see that the Wife of Bath is described as being angry or wrathful when the other women in the parish move towards the altar before her. This depicts a sense of entitlement and selfishness, which might suggest pettiness on her part.
Regarding her holiness, the passage does not explicitly indicate whether she is holy or not. It mainly focuses on her reaction to the actions of others around her.
To assess her rationality, we can observe that her anger appears to be disproportionate to the situation. Getting "quite out of charity" because others moved ahead of her seems irrational considering it does not seem to warrant such a strong reaction.
As for generosity, the passage does not provide much information about the Wife of Bath's behavior in that regard. It primarily portrays her anger and lack of charitable spirit when others move ahead of her.
In summary, based on the passage, one could argue that the Wife of Bath may be described as petty due to her reaction, irrational due to the intensity of her anger, and lacking in generosity due to her lack of charity towards others. However, the passage does not explicitly address her holiness.