[DCRM-L] Tironian "et" revisited: not an ampersand

[JOHN LANCASTER]

Short answer to your question, Erin: Yes.

And to Julie’s question: No.

John


> On Sep 20, 2021, at 2:34 PM, Erin Blake <erin.blake.folger at gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> Julie Kemper posed an excellent question on the Folger blog post about Brevigraphs <https://collation.folger.edu/brevigraphs> last week, "
> One question I have is why ampersands and Tironian notes are treated the same. To me they are separate symbols and ampersands should be transcribed as “&” while Tironian notes should be transcribed as “[et]”. Am I being overly pedantic about something which hardly anyone cares about?
> 
> That gave me a deja-vu feeling, so I went to the DCRM-L archives, and sure enough, back in 2003 <https://listserver.lib.byu.edu/pipermail/dcrm-l/2003-March/000423.html>, then again in 2011 <https://listserver.lib.byu.edu/pipermail/dcrm-l/2011-August/002495.html>, and again in 2013 <https://listserver.lib.byu.edu/pipermail/dcrm-l/2013-September/003226.html> the collective "we" of this list identified the instruction to transcribe a Tironian sign “et” (⁊) as an ampersand as a problem: mounting evidence showed that "[et]" would be a more appropriate transcription than "&"  but the problem was set aside until "the joint DCRM" was being written. In other words, the time is now.
> 
> Looking back at the discussions, I think the problem originated because gothic type ampersands (in no. 1 of the blog post, an "e" and "t" combined) were being conflated with the Tironian sign "et" (no. 8, short-hand representation of the sound "et"):
> 1.  [ampersand]
> This is the easy one. Ampersands are still in use today, so instead of expanding the brevigraph & in square brackets, rare materials catalogers simply use an ampersand. 
> = & (Latin, see in context <http://collation.folger.edu/wp-content/uploads/sites/2/2021/09/Ampersand_in_context.jpg>)
> = & (English, see in context <http://collation.folger.edu/wp-content/uploads/sites/2/2021/09/et_in_context.jpg>)
>   = &c. (Latin, see in context <http://collation.folger.edu/wp-content/uploads/sites/2/2021/09/etc_in_context.jpg>)
> 8.  [7 at beginning of word]
> An alternative shape for &, but actually the Tironian short hand <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tironian_notes> symbol ⁊, which represents the sound “et” (rather than the word as such). If a particular font didn’t have a dedicated Tironian sign et, then ꝛ (a small “r rotunda <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/R_rotunda>“) could be used. Because the symbol is a representation of & and because & is still used today, rare materials catalogers silently replace it with &. See no. 1 for ampersandy ampersands.
> = & (Latin, see in context <http://collation.folger.edu/wp-content/uploads/sites/2/2021/09/Tironian_sign_et_in_context.jpg>)
> = &[cetera] (Latin, with r-rotunda, see in context <http://collation.folger.edu/wp-content/uploads/sites/2/2021/09/etcetera_in_context.jpg>; see no. 3 for [cetera])
> Is it time to move the Tironian sign "et" into DCRMR's "Brevigraphs" chart, leaving "&" behind in the "Early letterforms and symbols" chart?
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Erin.
> 
> ______________________
>  <>Erin Blake, Ph.D.  |  Senior Cataloger  |  Folger Shakespeare Library  |  201 E. Capitol St. SE, Washington, DC, 20003  |   <>eblake at folger.edu <mailto:eblake at folger.edu>  |  www.folger.edu <https://protect-us.mimecast.com/s/-t5RCjRgpBtArRXC7R7_2?domain=urldefense.com>   |  Pronouns: she/her/hers
> 
> 
>  

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listserver.lib.byu.edu/pipermail/dcrm-l/attachments/20210920/931866e8/attachment-0001.htm>