[DCRB-L] [WG2] Tironian sign & ampersand

[James Larrabee]

If I may raise what is a somewhat closed point: while seeing the logic
of transcribing the Tironian sign as an ampersand, and while in times
past I would have welcomed getting rid of the pesky [et], now I feel
there is something about this solution that isn't quite right.
Subjective, maybe, but the questions remain.

On analysis, I think this bothers me for something like the following
reasons. The ampersand is, apart from survivals in a few limited
applications, obsolete. (Callard & Bowser, Bartleby & Scrivener, Smith &
Co.) For general usage, it went out with the long s. Given that, it
draws attention to itself when outside its current bailiwick. (In fact,
it draws attention to itself everywhere, so its survival might be
explained by the desire to gussy up a corporate name or whatever; for
law firms, to maintain a lawyer-like appearance of conservatism.) Now,
if it draws attention to itself, it conveys to the mind an subtle
impression of representing itself, rather than simply the concept "and"
(in a given language). Therefore, I think it gives some suggestion that
the ampersand is really to be found in the source, where obviously
"[et]" (or "[&]"?) would not. Thus the ampersand would not be suitable
in a transcription, which must represent the orthography, or symbology,
of the source.

I'm not convinced that "&" and the Tironian sign are two forms of the
same sign. Why else would they have different names? I'm not
knowledgeable on the ms. history, but even if there is some common
origin, signs can grow apart (u/v/i/j did). And if two different
symbols/signs both mean "et" or its equivalent, are they really the same
symbol/sign? Are these signs really equivalent or just "functionally
equivalent"? Is functionally equivalent close enough for transcription
or should it be allowed only in translation?

So I think we might consider whether the &/Tironian equivalence really
fits into a consistent system of transcription.

And I ought to add that Leslie & Griffin have done a really marvelous
job on the position paper. Not much work left for the rest of us,
certainly!

James Larrabee
Robbins Collection Cataloger
Law Library
University of California, Berkeley
Berkeley, CA 94720
(510) 642-1114
larrabee at law.berkeley.edu