3.357 old and new spellings (185)
Willard McCarty (MCCARTY@VM.EPAS.UTORONTO.CA)
Tue, 15 Aug 89 21:52:40 EDT
Humanist Discussion Group, Vol. 3, No. 357. Tuesday, 15 Aug 1989.
(1) Date: Tue, 15 Aug 89 08:14:17 EDT (18 lines)
From: David Megginson <MEGGIN@vm.epas.utoronto.ca>
Subject: Re: 3.355 old-spelling texts? "nuclear fiction"? (54)
(2) Date: Tue, 15 Aug 89 08:29:00 EDT (18 lines)
From: MORGAN@LOYVAX.BITNET
Subject: RE: 3.355 old-spelling texts? "nuclear fiction"? (54)
(3) Date: Tuesday, 15 August 1989 0901-EST (38 lines)
From: KRAFT@PENNDRLS
Subject: Archaic/Modern Text Forms
(4) Date: Tue, 15 Aug 89 11:37:41 EDT (13 lines)
From: amsler@flash.bellcore.com (Robert A Amsler)
Subject: Old works in New clothes
(5) Date: Tue, 15 Aug 89 08:30:47 PLT (23 lines)
From: "Guy L. Pace" <PACE@WSUVM1>
Subject: old-spelling texts
(6) Date: Tue, 15 Aug 89 17:39:55 CDT (9 lines)
From: "Michael S. Hart" <HART@UIUCVME>
Subject: Re: 3.355 old-spelling texts? "nuclear fiction"? (54)
(7) Date: 15 August 1989 (22 lines)
From: Willard McCarty <MCCARTY@vm.epas.utoronto.ca>
Subject: old and new spellings of the Bard's words
(1) --------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Tue, 15 Aug 89 08:14:17 EDT
From: David Megginson <MEGGIN@vm.epas.utoronto.ca>
Subject: Re: 3.355 old-spelling texts? "nuclear fiction"? (54)
There are good reasons for using original spellings for any text from
the eighteenth-century on. The specialist reader _wants_ to see those
spellings, and the amateur reader appreciates the small (but enjoyable)
challenge of mastering them.
The only one who would prefer modern spellings is the poor, over-worked
undergraduate, who would rather not be reading the book in the first
place, and resents anything that prolongs the reading period. Of course,
not all undergraduates feel this way, but those who don't fall into the
'amateur reader' catagory.
Bettest wisches (just joking)
David Megginson <MEGGIN@vm.epas.utoronto.ca>
(2) --------------------------------------------------------------25----
Date: Tue, 15 Aug 89 08:29:00 EDT
From: MORGAN@LOYVAX.BITNET
Subject: RE: 3.355 old-spelling texts? "nuclear fiction"? (54)
In answer to the query about "old-spelling texts", I must say that
as a medievalist, I prefer to produce the old spelling versions in
Italian, with notes as necessary. The problems are somewhat less in
Italian, however, than, for example, Old French. I would say, under
such circumstances, that a side-by-side (old and modern) version might
fill the bill. Even for languages which I know less well (e.g., German)
when I look up older texts, I try for the side-by-side approach, since
I enjoy seeing and playing with different orthographical and non-
regularized forms. Maybe this is an occupational hazard, however,
and you should seek responses from modernists!
Leslie Morgan
Loyola College
Dept. of Foreign Langs. and Lits.
(MORGAN@LOYVAX)
(3) --------------------------------------------------------------41----
Date: Tuesday, 15 August 1989 0901-EST
From: KRAFT@PENNDRLS
Subject: Archaic/Modern Text Forms
Roy Flannagan requests responses on the question of how editors
are to approach the issue of "original" (spellings, punctuation,
formats, syntax, etc.) versus "modernized" forms of a given text.
My own experience ranges from the obvious problem of biblical
translations (which King James version would help you most?)
to the equally vexing question of how to transcribe old (or even
new) diaries and journals -- do I resolve abbreviations, correct
spelling inconsistencies, modernize spellings, etc.
The ideal, I think, is somehow to preserve it all. For the King
James Bible, this involves an extensive apparatus of "variations"
that have appeared over the centuries, all of which could be useful
to persons attempting to identify quotations and allusions in the
various literatures they are researching. For the diaries (as for
ancient manuscripts and fragments), the non-standard and non-modern
information is of potential value to persons studying a wide range
of subjects from dialects and informal language patterns to
acquired habits, spelling and punctuation evolution, and the like.
Sometimes it is possible to "document" the edition by pointing out
in the introduction that the original text consistently used
"staid" where the edition has "stayed," or "publick" where
the edition has "public," that "M." has been resolved to "Mr."
or that "Aunt M." is filled out to "Aunt Mary" when it is
absolutely certain that such an identification is correct.
But usually, this sort of information needs to be encoded in
some sort of textual apparatus. This discussion of how best to code
"textual variants" has appeared on HUMANIST in the past, but needs
continued attention until some commonly accepted standards emerge.
Any progress, Michael Sp-McQ? If we want our programs to serve us
well, the software developers need to be able to handle effectively
this type of issue (e.g. searching the recorded variants to identify
the target passage).
Bob Kraft (CCAT)
(4) --------------------------------------------------------------17----
Date: Tue, 15 Aug 89 11:37:41 EDT
From: amsler@flash.bellcore.com (Robert A Amsler)
Subject: Old works in New clothes
I must confess I am not one who felt great outrage at the
colorization of films, and changing spellings in classic works
strikes me as minor compared to that. What I think I'd find
appropriate is that whatever changes are made, they be described
in some detail in an appendix to the work. Intellectual freedom
seems to me to greatly detract from its potential when it
fails to make explicit all that it knows about how it
is being exercised. Taking artistic license should be
encouraged; concealing what license has been taken should not.
(5) --------------------------------------------------------------27----
Date: Tue, 15 Aug 89 08:30:47 PLT
From: "Guy L. Pace" <PACE@WSUVM1>
Subject: old-spelling texts
Call me a purist, but I think that the original documents by such authors
as William James and Shakespeare should be edited/transcribed with all the
accuracy and faithfulness as is humanly (and computerly) possible.
>From where I sit, the above-mentioned were masters of the language. Their
period vernacular also reflects the character of the time.
Any editing for the modern reader, as I see it, would destroy the original
beauty and artistic intent of the works. Just look at the mess created by
the various versions of The Bible, with conflicting interpretations to boot.
We also have a relatively recent example of translated Shakespeare in "West
Side Story." Nice musical, strong dialog. Poor second cousin to "Romeo and
Juliet."
Besides, just think of the fun you'd miss when you assign Shakespeare to
that group of wide-eyed freshmen, if the plays were all translated to
the modern:
ROMEO: Tibalt, you mangy alley-cat!
TIBALT: Eat steel, Romeo!
Something is lost.
(6) --------------------------------------------------------------18----
Date: Tue, 15 Aug 89 17:39:55 CDT
From: "Michael S. Hart" <HART@UIUCVME>
Subject: Re: 3.355 old-spelling texts? "nuclear fiction"? (54)
re: Roy Flannagan's "old-spelling texts"
I would prefer that enough of Shakespeare remained in old style spelling
to keep the flavour, as it were, but would prefer "murther" as "murder"
to avoid pressuring the readers to spend too much time with references.
(7) --------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: 15 August 1989
From: Willard McCarty <MCCARTY@vm.epas.utoronto.ca>
Subject: old and new spellings of the Bard's words
Our attribution of "flavour" to old-spelled texts is an interesting
phenomenon worthy of a psychologist's time, but I doubt that much could
be made of it from a literary perspective. There are all sorts of
problems with the significance of an old spelling, aren't there? --
including typesetting habits, transcriptional practices, and so forth.
Still, anything that drives the reader to the OED has some pedagogical
value, I suppose.
The electronic medium offers the possibility of both, e.g., an
old-spelled text that can be transformed, word-by-word, to modern
spelling on request. I've seen this sort of thing done between a Middle
English text and its Modern English translation. I realize that the
editor of a printed edition is not helped by such marvels, but the
student may if the facilities are available.
Willard McCarty