<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=Content-Type content="text/html; charset=us-ascii">
<META content="MSHTML 6.00.2800.1400" name=GENERATOR></HEAD>
<BODY>
<DIV><STRONG><FONT face=Tahoma color=#0000ff size=2><SPAN
class=390205901-29072004> </SPAN></FONT></STRONG></DIV>
<DIV><STRONG><FONT face=Tahoma color=#0000ff size=2><SPAN
class=390205901-29072004> I think it's better using original
spelling and punctuation than a "regularized" one, because, Which
"regularization" are you going to use??? One
for </SPAN></FONT></STRONG><STRONG><FONT face=Tahoma color=#0000ff
size=2><SPAN class=390205901-29072004>english readers? or one for spanish
readers? or even one for norwegian readers?</SPAN></FONT></STRONG></DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE><FONT face=arial,helvetica><FONT face=Geneva color=#000000 size=2
FAMILY="SANSSERIF"><STRONG><FONT face=Tahoma
color=#0000ff></FONT></STRONG><BR>
<BLOCKQUOTE
style="PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; BORDER-LEFT: #0000ff 2px solid; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px"
cite="" TYPE="CITE"></FONT><FONT face=Geneva color=#000000 size=2
FAMILY="SANSSERIF">I will be publishing an English translation of a
sixteenth century Aztec history (relatively) soon and I have a major
decision to make about the way I present the Nahuatl text. My original
intent was to present the Nahuatl text in the two-colum (Nahuatl-English)
format with the original spelling and punctuation, so that these features of
the original manuscript would be available for study (for such purposes as
identifying provenance and related things). Somewhere along the line, I let
myself be convinced by a reviewer that regularizing the spelling to a modern
orthography would make the text more useful to a broader range of students,
and I did that. Now, I'm having second thoughts, particularly since the most
recent reviewer has reiterated my original thinking and strongly recommended
restoring the original spelling and punctuation. Since this was my original
intent, I'd lean towards following that advice, but since Nahuatl research
is *not* my primary area of expertise, I'd really like to hear what those of
you who work in the area believe to be the better approach: a straight
transcription of the original text or a modernized orthography for the
Nahuatl column?<BR><BR>Richley Crapo<BR></BLOCKQUOTE></FONT><FONT face=Geneva
color=#000000 size=2 FAMILY="SANSSERIF"><BR><BR></BLOCKQUOTE></FONT><FONT
face=Geneva color=#000000 size=2 FAMILY="SANSSERIF"></FONT></FONT></BODY></HTML>