[DCRM-L] "[the]" versus "[th]e" (but definitely not "ye")

[Laurence S. Creider]

An additional argument of Jennifer's suggestion is that AMREMM follows the
same procedure, to wit,
"0F8. Expand all suspensions, contractions, nomina sacra, Tironian notes,
symbols and other abbreviations to the full form, enclosing suppolied
letters or words in square brackets. ... Do not reproduce Tironian notae,
the ampersand, or other symbols, but instead supply in square brackets the
letters or words for which they stand in the language of the text."
The examples give transcription of the ampersand as [et] or [and] or (this
would depend on language), and to translate the Tironian note 7 as [et] or
[and] or ....

It would be nice if the same principle was adopted for the post-1600 notes
here.

Larry

P.S. My initial reaction was what would Tironian notes be doing in a 20th
century ms, but Wikipedia says they are occasionally used from the 17th
century into the 20th.  That is one thing I enjoy about this list; I learn
a great deal.

-- 
Laurence S. Creider
Head, Archives and Special Collections Dept.
University Library
New Mexico State University
Las Cruces, NM  88003
Work: 575-646-4756
Fax: 575-646-7477
lcreider at lib.nmsu.edu

On Wed, August 21, 2013 12:10 pm, jnelson at law.berkeley.edu wrote:
> Opening another can of worms here - or poking another bear, etc. -
> DCRM(MSS) was curious about the instruction to transcribe the Tironian
> note with an ampersand and not as [et]. The latter would seem more logical
> since the note is standing for [et] and not for &.
>
> What are people's thoughts about this?
>
> Thanks,
>
> Jenny
>
>> Your solution is a good one for DCRM(G).
>>
>> I would argue that transcription as "[the]" is consistent with other
>> brevigraphs in which an identifiable letter is modified in some way to
>> form the symbol. That is, we're considering the whole thing to be a
>> symbol, with square brackets around the expanded symbol. Cf. quo, quod,
>> recta, pri, que, hoc, &c.
>>
>> From: dcrm-l-bounces at lib.byu.edu [mailto:dcrm-l-bounces at lib.byu.edu] On
>> Behalf Of Erin Blake
>> Sent: Thursday, 25 July 2013 16:55
>> To: DCRM-L (dcrm-l at lib.byu.edu)
>> Subject: [DCRM-L] "[the]" versus "[th]e" (but definitely not "ye")
>>
>> At the risk of opening a can of worms, poking a bear, etc., what’s the
>> reason behind DCRM’s Appendix G instruction to use “[the]” and
>> “[that]”
>> rather than “[th]e” and “[th]t”?  Or, alternatively,
>> “[th][a]t” (one set
>> of brackets for the early contraction, another for the supplied letter).
>>
>> It doesn’t follow the pattern of the rest of the table (where the
>> square-bracketed letters from column 2 are exactly the same as the
>> square
>> bracketed letters in column 4). It also doesn’t follow what I’ve
>> seen of
>> early modern manuscript transcription practices, where it would be
>> either
>> “ye” and “yt” or “[th]e” and “[th]t.” (And I do
>> understand why DCRM
>> doesn’t use “ye”)
>>
>> Little-y-with-a-teeny-e-on-top continued in handwriting longer than in
>> letterpress, so it comes up a lot in transcribed titles and imprints for
>> etchings and engravings. Several close-readers of DCRM(G), including
>> some
>> who are experienced rare book catalogers, thought a missing word was
>> being
>> supplied when reading “sold by all [the] book & printsellers in
>> London” or
>> “Miss - in the actual dress as she appear'd in [the] character of
>> Iphigenia, at [the] Jubiliee Ball or Masquerade at Ranelagh.”
>>
>> To avoid confusion in DCRM(G), each example with “[the]” has the
>> comment
>> underneath, ““[the]” replaces the brevigraph “yͤ” on the
>> material.” (If
>> your e-mail client has a full understanding of Unicode, the thing after
>> “brevigraph” should be a “Latin small letter y” plus Unicode
>> 0364, a
>> "combining Latin small letter e" from the Medieval Superscript Letter
>> Diacritics section of  Combining Diacritical Marks, see
>> http://www.unicode.org/charts/PDF/U0300.pdf).
>>
>> 7B4.2 says we can add “explanations of cataloger-supplied letters or
>> words” in a note, if considered important, so DCRM(G) gives the
>> example
>> “Brevigraph sometimes incorrectly rendered "ye" expanded as [the].”
>>
>> Is there any chance that the next iteration of DCRM will reconsider
>> “[th]e” for internal consistency and user convenience?
>>
>> Thanks for letting me vent.
>>
>>    Erin.
>>
>> --------------------------------------------------
>> Erin C. Blake, Ph.D.  |  Curator of Art & Special Collections  |  Folger
>> Shakespeare Library  |  201 E. Capitol St. SE  |  Washington, DC
>> 20003-1004  |  office tel. +1 (202) 675-0323  |  fax: +1 (202) 675-0328
>> |
>>  eblake at folger.edu<mailto:eblake at folger.edu>  |
>> www.folger.edu<http://www.folger.edu/> |
>> collation.folger.edu<http://collation.folger.edu/>
>>
>>
>
>
>