LL-L: "Copy-editing" LOWLANDS-L, 13.MAY.2001 (03) [E]

[Lowlands-L]

======================================================================
 L O W L A N D S - L * 13.MAY.2001 (03) * ISSN 189-5582 * LCSN 96-4226
 Posting Address: <lowlands-l at listserv.linguistlist.org>
 Web Site: <http://www.geocities.com/sassisch/rhahn/lowlands/>
 User's Manual: <http://www.lsoft.com/manuals/1.8c/userindex.html>
 Archive: <http://listserv.linguistlist.org/archives/lowlands-l.html>
=======================================================================
 A=Afrikaans, Ap=Appalachean, D=Dutch, E=English, F=Frisian, L=Limburgish
 LS=Low Saxon (Low German), S=Scots, Sh=Shetlandic, Z=Zeelandic (Zeeuws)
=======================================================================

From: Sandy Fleming [sandy at scotstext.org]
Subject: "Copyediting"

Dear Lowlanders,

The programming for the new ScotsteXt website is nearing
completion (although building the text database will take
a few months yet). It will have much easier navigation
(no more drop-down menus, just plenty of lists using direct
links in the margins) and a full search engine as well as
various other frills such as a family filter (blame Burns
and that notebook of his!) audio facilities &c &c.

However, before I start building the database in earnest I
need to make a decision as to whether the texts should be
presented in their original form, or whether it would be
better to "improve" them, and to what extent they need to
be improved.

Some considerations:

1. I've already attempted various schemes for allowing the
user to select between original and "improved" texts, and
it always seems to come back to the fact that offering more
than one version of every text is far more trouble than it's
worth.

2. ScotsteXt is intended for reading pleasure and educational
use, not as a manuscript repository for academics (I could
never make a web resource into a substitute for consulting
the original books and manuscripts in museums and libraries);

3. There already is an example of an "improved" text on
ScotsteXt (D. Gibb Mitchell's "Sermons in Braid Scots").
In improving this I did a few things that I've now decided
tend to kill off the author's voice (and which I'll be
reversing in this text in due course):

    o  correcting grammar;
    o  attempting full standardisation (instead, I now think
       the author's choice of dialect words should be allowed
       to stand, eg I shouldn't have changed Mitchell's
       "throwe" to "throu");
    o  using contrived modern (eg RWS) spellings.

However, there's no doubt that the orthography of virtually
all texts in Scots poses serious problems. To take a passage
from Burns's "Tam O'Shanter", for example:

Coffins stood round like open presses,
That shaw'd the dead in their last dresses;
And by some devilish cantraip sleight
Each in its cauld hand held a light,
By which heroic Tam was able
To note upon the haly table
A murderer's banes in gibbet-airns;
Twa span-lang, wee, unchristen'd bairns;
A thief new-cutted frae the rape-
Wi' his last gasp his gab did gape;
Five tomahawks, wi' blude red rusted;
Five scymitars, wi' murder crusted;
A garter, which a babe had strangled;
A knife, a father's throat had mangled,
Whom his ain son o' life bereft-
The gray hairs yet stack to the heft;
Wi' mair of horrible and awfu',
Which even to name wad be unlawfu'.

It may be that in Burns's day nobody would have thought of
pronouncing words like "round", "dead" and "light" the
English way in a passage of Scots, but this isn't true
today, if ever it was. Besides, there are some clear
inconsistencies, such as the use of "o'" in some places
and "of" in others. So, after running a few Word macros
I've written for "improving" Scots and doing final
corrections by hand, I arrive at the "improved" text:

Coffins stude roond like open presses,
That shaw'd the deid in their last dresses;
An bi some deevilish cantraip slicht
Each in its cauld hand held a licht,
Bi which heroic Tam wis able
Tae note upon the haly table
A murderer's banes in gibbet-airns;
Twa span-lang, wee, unchristen'd bairns;
A thief new-cutted frae the rape-
Wi his last gasp his gab did gape;
Five tomahawks, wi blude red rusted;
Five scymitars, wi murder crusted;
A gairter, which a babe haed strangled;
A knife, a faither's throat haed mangled,
Wham his ain son o life bereft-
The gray hairs yet stack tae the heft;
Wi mair o horrible an awfu,
Which even tae name wad be unlawfu.

Some notes on this:

1. Although the continual use of "which" and "whom" will
grate on Scots speakers' nerves, I've left them because
of my decision not to correct grammar. I assume that most
Scots speakers will, like myself, correct them in recitation
anyway.

2. I've left alone spellings like "blude", which in other
texts might be "bluid", since neither is any more correct
than the other. This lack of standardisation means that the
reader can still see plenty of the character of the original
text without having to suffer errors of anglification.
However, had it been "blood" I would have changed it to
"bluid" or "blude" according to what seems to be the writer's
own preference (for example, in "stood" -> "stude", above,
"stude" is chosen rather than "stood", by analogy with
Burns's own choice of "blude"). Note that the search engine
will be able to deal with spelling variants.

3. All unnecessary apostrophes are removed. In the above
this removes all but those required by the "Saxon genitive"
and the "-'d" of the traditional poetic diction of the time.
This doesn't seem so important in this text, but in some
texts, particularly in prose, it can be a real strain on the
eyes.

So the questions I'm asking in this submission is:

1. Does anyone see any objections that might be raised to
   this sort of "improvement"?

2. Is there anything in the policies I've suggested above
   that anyone would have a problem with?

Sandy
http://scotstext.org
A dinna dout him, for he says that he
On nae accoont wad ever tell a lee.
                          - C.W.Wade,
                    'The Adventures o McNab'

==================================END===================================
 You have received this because your account has been subscribed upon
 request. To unsubscribe, please send the command "signoff lowlands-l"
 as message text from the same account to
 <listserv at listserv.linguistlist.org> or sign off at
 <http://linguistlist.org/subscribing/sub-lowlands-l.html>.
=======================================================================
 * Please submit contributions to <lowlands-l at listserv.linguistlist.org>.
 * Contributions will be displayed unedited in digest form.
 * Please display only the relevant parts of quotes in your replies.
 * Commands for automated functions (including "signoff lowlands-l") are
   to be sent to <listserv at listserv.linguistlist.org> or at
   <http://linguistlist.org/subscribing/sub-lowlands-l.html>.
 * Please use only Plain Text format, not Rich Text (HTML) or any other
   type of format, in your submissions
=======================================================================