Q: symbols and abbreviations

[Larry Trask]

----------------------------Original message----------------------------
Alexis M R writes:
 
> I have one suggestion.  The way Larry presents the
> information is misleading in one important way.
> You mention each possible use of each symbol
> but do not indiacte the systems of oppositions
> they enter into. Thus, it may be that in philology
> some people use parens for what other people mark
> with square brackets, but the information that is
> missing is what the systems in use are.  This would
> really be useful to have, esp. for those like me
> who are not too familiar with said systems.  It
> would also be good to be told which systems
> are more widely used or considered standard.
 
This is a very reasonable point.  But my problem is that I am writing
a dictionary, not a handbook, and so all I can reasonably do is to
enter things alphabetically.  Entering the symbols has already proved
a nuisance, of course.  At the moment, I am entering each symbol
alphabetically under its name, and I plan to list the symbols with
their names in an introduction.  Possibly, though, it might be more
efficient to enter all the symbols in a group at the end of the
dictionary, though in this case I will lose the names unless I just
stick them in somewhat awkwardly.
 
As usual, all advice gratefully received.  But remember that I have a
length limit, and that I'm writing a dictionary.  Following up
Alexis's suggestion would probably require one or more appendices --
fine by me, but there's a limit to what I can squeeze in without
giving my editor heart failure.
 
Larry Trask
COGS
University of Sussex
Brighton BN1 9QH
UK
 
larryt at cogs.susx.ac.uk