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

[Jennifer K. Nelson]

Hi Larry, everyone,

Just to clarify: this came up in a general discussion, not specifically 
as related to manuscripts. I think our conversation started when we were 
looking at Appendix G to DCRM(B), specifically the instruction in G2 
where it says to transcribe both the Tironian note and the ampersand as 
an ampersand (as well as "[Tironian note]c" as &c.). I think its the 
last example in the grid.

Personally, I think it makes much more sense in any case - whether in 
printed books or in manuscripts - to transcribe a Tironian note as an 
ampersand, when what it stands for is the word [et], not the symbol "&".

Thanks,

Jenny


On 8/21/13 12:00 PM, Laurence S. Creider wrote:
> 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.
>

-- 
Jennifer K. Nelson
Reference Librarian
The Robbins Collection
UC Berkeley School of Law (Boalt Hall)
Berkeley, CA 94720
jnelson at law.berkeley.edu
Tel: 510.643.9709
Fax: 510.642.8325
www.law.berkeley.edu/library/robbins/