[Lingtyp] orthography in formatted examples

Wed Mar 25 14:45:44 UTC 2020

The problem with initial capitalization is that there are no capital  
letters for special symbols (e.g. from the IPA). Or am I wrong?

Best,
Katharina

Quoting "Haspelmath, Martin" <haspelmath at shh.mpg.de>:

> Yes, punctuation and initial capitalization should be included, and  
> names capitalized. By definition, when we write a language in a  
> consistent way, we use an orthography.
>
> (I think the older idea that languages which are not frequently used  
> for writing by their speakers should be represented phonetically has  
> become obsolete. We allowed it as one option in the WALS chapters,  
> but most authors used punctuation and capitalization.)
>
> This practice is also recommended by the Generic Style Rules (see  
> §10:  
> https://www.eva.mpg.de/linguistics/past-research-resources/resources/generic-style-rules.html)
>
> Best,
> Martin
>
> On 25.03.20 14:49, John Du Bois wrote:
> Hi Christian,
> Thanks for your thoughtful post.
>      I would argue for including punctuation, because it may be  
> significant as a representation of prosody, or it may serve as its  
> near equivalent, either of which is meaningful. The current glossing  
> conventions seem to carry the implicit assumption that language is  
> purely segmental.
>      You can even gloss the punctuation. For example, in Discourse  
> Functional Transcription (DFT), a comma signals "continuing"  
> intonation, while a period signals "final" intonation.
> Best,
> Jack
>
> ==============================
> John W. Du Bois
> Professor of Linguistics
> University of California, Santa Barbara
> Santa Barbara, California 93106
> USA
> dubois at ucsb.edu<mailto:dubois at ucsb.edu>
>
> On Wed, Mar 25, 2020, 4:15 AM Christian Lehmann  
> <christian.lehmann at uni-erfurt.de<mailto:christian.lehmann at uni-erfurt.de>>  
> wrote:
>
> Dear colleagues,
>
> here is a little methodological problem which some may dismiss as  
> trivial but which needs to be solved if we care for standardizing  
> linguistic methodology. It concerns the orthographic representation  
> of linguistic data, esp. such as are provided with an interlinear  
> gloss.
>
> In the past decades, it has become customary in linguistic  
> publications to omit punctuation in data which are formatted as  
> examples and provided by a gloss, like this:
>
>
> quo
>
>
> usque
>
>
> tandem
>
>
> abutere
>
>
> Catilina
>
>
> patientia
>
>
> nostra
>
>
> whither
>
>
> continually
>
>
> finally
>
>
> abuse:FUT:MID.2.SG<http://MID.2.SG>
>
>
> Catilina:VOC.SG<http://VOC.SG>
>
>
> patience(F):ABL.SG<http://ABL.SG>
>
>
> our:F.ABL.SG<http://F.ABL.SG>
>
>
> “ How far will you continue to abuse our patience, Catiline?” (Cic.  
> Cat. I, 1)
>
>
> The example is actually taken from a text; and there it is, of  
> course, provided with initial capitalization, with commas in between  
> and with a final question mark. Many of us have gotten accustomed to  
> omitting these things in formatted examples. My own guidelines for  
> interlinear glosses
>
> (christianlehmann.eu/ling/ling_meth/ling_description/grammaticography/gloss/<http://christianlehmann.eu/ling/ling_meth/ling_description/grammaticography/gloss/>)
>
> also recommend the omission. The practice seems inevitable for a  
> representation of a piece of text which is not in orthography but in  
> some more formal representation, say phonetic or morphophonemic.  
> Here I am talking about orthographic representations.
>
> There are some reasons for the practice of omitting punctuation and  
> sentence-initial capitalization in glossed examples:
>
>   1.  These orthographic marks may not figure in the original source:
>
>      *   There is no published orthographic version which would need  
> to be cited literally; it is just a transcription of a recording.  
> Omission of punctuation signals this.
>
>      *   The quoted stretch of text is not (necessarily) a sentence,  
> be it in its original context, be it in the language system.
>
>   1.  These orthographic marks would confuse the mapping of symbols  
> structuring the interlinear gloss onto the original text line:
>
>      *   Punctuation symbols like ‘.’, ‘:’ have a special function  
> in glosses which they do not have in a fully orthographic text line.  
> Others like ‘,’ and ‘!’ are inadmissible in the gloss. If such  
> symbols appeared in the original text line, they would map on  
> nothing in the gloss line.
>
>      *   Punctuation symbols like ‘-’ should have the same function  
> in the original text and in the gloss.
>
> (Ad (1b): We are not talking about examples which are just syntagmas  
> below clause level. In some linguistic publications, such examples  
> are provided with a final full stop, too. This is plainly unthinking.)
>
> Here are some reasons for abandoning the ban on punctuation and  
> initial capitalization:
>
>   1.  It makes the language exemplified appear as one which lacks an  
> orthography, thus dangerously evoking the attitude towards „an idiom  
> which does not even have a grammar“.
>
>   2.  Punctuation, of course, fulfills a sensible function in  
> established orthographies: it reflects the syntactic or prosodic  
> structure of a piece of text. Omitting it from an example renders  
> this less easily intelligible.
>
>   3.  Whenever a linguistic example is, in fact, quoted from a text  
> noted in established orthography, the quotation should be faithful,  
> including the punctuation.
>
>   4.  Current practice allows for exceptions to the principle of  
> suppression of punctuation: at least question marks are commonly set.
>
> You may know of more reasons for or against the practice of  
> suppression of punctuation and of initial capitalization in  
> linguistic examples, or you may be able to invalidate some of the  
> above. I would be grateful for some discussion which helps to bring  
> this closer to a recommendation that most of us could share and that  
> would have a chance to find its way into style sheets.
>
> Christian
>
> --
>
> Prof. em. Dr. Christian Lehmann
> Rudolfstr. 4
> 99092 Erfurt
> Deutschland
>
> Tel.:   +49/361/2113417
> E-Post: christianw_lehmann at arcor.de<mailto:christianw_lehmann at arcor.de>
> Web:    https://www.christianlehmann.eu
> _______________________________________________
> Lingtyp mailing list
> Lingtyp at listserv.linguistlist.org<mailto:Lingtyp at listserv.linguistlist.org>
> http://listserv.linguistlist.org/mailman/listinfo/lingtyp
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Lingtyp mailing list
> Lingtyp at listserv.linguistlist.org<mailto:Lingtyp at listserv.linguistlist.org>
> http://listserv.linguistlist.org/mailman/listinfo/lingtyp
>
>
>
>
> --
> Martin Haspelmath (haspelmath at shh.mpg.de<mailto:haspelmath at shh.mpg.de>)
> Max Planck Institute for the Science of Human History
> Kahlaische Strasse 10
> D-07745 Jena
> &
> Leipzig University
> Institut fuer Anglistik
> IPF 141199
> D-04081 Leipzig