[Lingtyp] orthography in formatted examples

[Sebastian Nordhoff]

Dear all,
I have typeset over 100 LangSci books with contributions from over 1000 
authors. There seem to be a hierarchy

? > ! > . >  ,

This means that people who would use a given symbol would also use all 
symbols to the left.

We use the following rule: if an example ends with [?!.], it should 
start with a capital letter and vice versa (Proper names are an 
exception). If an example does not end with one of these punctuation 
marks, it should not start with a capital letter.

Best wishes
Sebastian





On 3/25/20 12:15 PM, Christian Lehmann wrote:
> Dear colleagues,
> 
> here is a little methodological problem which some may dismiss as 
> trivial but which needs to be solved if we care 
> forstandardizinglinguistic methodology. It concerns the orthographic 
> representation of linguistic data, esp. suchasare 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
> 
> 	
> 
> Catilina:VOC.SG
> 
> 	
> 
> patience(F):ABL.SG
> 
> 	
> 
> our: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 initialcapitalization, with commasin 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/) 
> 
> 
> also recommend the omission. The practice seems inevitable for a 
> representation of a piece of text which is not in orthography but in 
> some moreformal representation, say phonetic or morphophonemic. Here I 
> am talking about *orthographic representations*.
> 
> There are somereasons for the practice of omitting punctuation and 
> sentence-initial capitalizationin glossed examples:
> 
>  1.
> 
>     These orthographic marks maynot figure in the original source:
> 
>      1.
> 
>         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.
> 
>      2.
> 
>         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:
> 
>      1.
> 
>         Punctuation symbols like ‘.’, ‘:’ have a special function in
>         glosses which they do not have in a fully orthographictext line.
>         Others like ‘,’ and ‘!’are inadmissible in the gloss. If such
>         symbolsappeared in the original text line, they would map on
>         nothing in the gloss line.
> 
>      2.
> 
>         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 
> areprovided with a final full stop, too. This is plainly unthinking.)
> 
> Here are some reasons for abandoning the ban onpunctuation 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 capitalizationin linguistic examples, or 
> you may be able to invalidate some of the above. I would be grateful for 
> some discussion which helpsto 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
> Web: 	https://www.christianlehmann.eu
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Lingtyp mailing list
> Lingtyp at listserv.linguistlist.org
> http://listserv.linguistlist.org/mailman/listinfo/lingtyp
>