Category: Uncategorized

Categories
Uncategorized

Assignment #1

The Moravian Transcription assignment was something I had never done before.  I enjoyed it at first, I thought it was really cool being able to do this, but then it got much harder than I had anticipated.  I was in a group of 4 people, and my group and I split up the 17, or so pages.  We each did 5-6 pages, and at the end of the process we used each other for peer reading, having each other pick out the words we could not get.  The words were either written too messy or too small or I just did not recognize the words that were written. Every group had different writings. They were written in different time periods, and different people wrote them, so each could have either been easier or harder to read.  My process of transcribing the whole pages was to just write down the words I would translate and then leave question marks where I did not recognize, and then come back to them later. This allowed me to use the sentence around the words to help me find the word. Knowing the context made more sense.  I would then ask my groupmates or the professors walking around for help, asking if they could make out the world I was struggling with. The words that I could not transcribe usually would come up again. It was nice because I could look back at those words and know what it was. The texts had many mentions of Jesus, God, and savior.  I am Catholic so I enjoyed having this as the subject and I recognized these words and knew some of the stories told. I felt connected to the theme and plot of these transcriptions.  I learned to write in cursive in elementary school, but never really kept with it, so I still had trouble reading the cursive. 

 

Scripto: http://moravian.bucknell.edu/scripto/?scripto_action=user_document_pages

Google Doc: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Nv-N7N0rR6puaTNT2_QHv_918cxgYppQjCQikAxSNqQ/edit

Categories
Uncategorized

Assignment #1

The understanding of how the transcription of a material document affects the researcher’s connection with that document. In my personal experience, transcribing the Moravian Lives piece in specifics the Samuel Tippet piece it was something that I had never done before. I have never completed a project similar to this one which is why I genuinely enjoyed doing so. It was interesting to me reading the work that the people of the Moravian Church had written. My group’s piece in particular was very religious and I’m assuming that this aspect was similar to a lot of the other groups’ works. I had never learned about these people before and it was intriguing to learn about them by reading their work and transcribing. It affects my understanding because it was almost like I was reading their journal or diary; it was a collection of their thoughts and at times it was super personal. There were also a few times because there were a few discrepancies within the text. Sometimes it was difficult to read and also there were misspellings. Perhaps this is how they spelled it at this certain time period, or just human error.

The process of digital text creation for my group started with dividing up who would transcribe what pages. After, we began to ‘decode’ in my mind. I would read the page and try to understand it best I could and later transcribe it. I would normally bold words I was unsure about or place a ‘?’ if I had no idea and check with my group partners after finishing the full page. I would tag people and places after I finished transcribing the page because I found it easier to do since the page told a little story and I started to pick up on words that were used often such as brother. I learned that this word needed to be tagged and was being used in a religious manner. After finishing all of my assigned pages, my group members double checked to make sure that all of our pages were both correctly transcribed and tagged. I felt that I had a connection to the documents because of how personal they were. For example, in some of the pages I transcribed the author spoke about their heart breaking and several emotions such as sadness and despair. I felt like I knew the character because of how deeply they were speaking and because I was rewriting their own words which no one had done before. The links to the original piece as well as my group’s transcribe piece are below.

 

Original: http://moravian.bucknell.edu/memoirs/Samuel-Tippet/

Transcribed Works Main Link: http://moravian.bucknell.edu/memoirs/Samuel-Tippet/

https://docs.google.com/document/d/13MJaRyAwmMfOANP_Th0uo7URnXYOoho1psEbMa9MMOc/edit

My Work: (Pgs. 7,8,10,15): http://moravian.bucknell.edu/scripto/?scripto_action=transcribe&scripto_doc_id=300045&scripto_doc_page_id=4000757

http://moravian.bucknell.edu/scripto/?scripto_action=transcribe&scripto_doc_id=300045&scripto_doc_page_id=4000758

http://moravian.bucknell.edu/scripto/?scripto_action=transcribe&scripto_doc_id=300045&scripto_doc_page_id=4000760

http://moravian.bucknell.edu/scripto/?scripto_action=transcribe&scripto_doc_id=300045&scripto_doc_page_id=4000765

 

 

Categories
Uncategorized

Blog #1

Having a digital artifact can be a really great thing.  It is extremely easy to access, no matter where you are.  It also will always be up, unless taken down by the owner.  I guess some disadvantages to making an artifact digital could be that someone who does not use technology could not access it.  Unless there is another way to access digital artifacts, then someone who is not technologically savvy would not be able to see or read it.  

  • Are we interacting with textual material on the screen more than on the (manuscript or printed) page, and if so, how are our research practices changing?

I believe that these days technology is such a big aspect of life.  Without technology, it is very hard to stay in loop with everything that happens around the world, and it is hard to stay in contact with other people.  I think that we are interacting with textual material on the screen more. There are still paper copies of textbooks and documents, but most books are all online, so it would be much easier to access that on the internet, so that is what most people do.  Because of this, research probably is changing more and more. It probably makes things easier having everything on your device, instead of a bunch of paper copies everywhere. This probably makes research easier because one can share their documents or notes to others by just emailing or sharing them online.  

  • Do digital versions of material texts highlight physical elements of texts that might otherwise pass unremarked?

On the subject of texts online, some might think that having these online, it would take away certain aspects of the textbook that could not be seen unless it was on paper.  Unless there is a textured page in the book, I do not think that that would be an issue. All of the writing and images would still be online, and having it online would probably make it even easier to read.  I think that having the text online would be pretty much the same as having it in front of you, reading wise.

  • What sources of knowledge and serendipitous discovery can be provided only in the physical archive? The digital archive?

Having archives digitized versus having the physical copy could have some differences.  If it is a handwritten document, the physical copy would allow you to feel the texture of the writing, and possibly the texture of an image that is hand drawn or painted.  This would allow one to possibly feel more connected to the archive, and it also could help a researcher find out more information about the document or artwork. Having something like this online would allow one to be able to read it more clearly because you can zoom in better online.  Also if the writing is blurry, there is technology that could make it clearer and easier to read.

This is an artifact that clearly has texture, so if this was digital versus the real copy, a researcher would be able to see and feel different things.

This paper artifact is something that would most likely not have texture, but it is clearly hard to read and is probably in a different language.  Having it digitized could help it become easier to read, and technology could probably easily translate it.

Categories
Uncategorized

Blog #1

One of the greatest uses of modern technology is the ability to create digital artifacts from archival documents. Archival documents are defined as “ information that serve as evidence of past events. They record information about past activities and act as memory aids that allow its users to recall and relive them or to re-communicate information about those events at some point in the future.” Archival documents are incredibly precious and interesting. They give us important information and keep us conscious of our past. However, it is so incredibly vital to transition these archives into digital artifacts. A digital artifact is defined as “an artifact that is of a digital nature or creation. For example, a gif is such an artifact. Digital artifact can be of any content types including text, audio, video, image, animation or a combination.” Digital material lives on and is stored for forever, whereas archives have the potential to be destroyed in some way or another. It is of the utmost importance that the archives be protected against any potential harm. Therefore, creating digital artifacts is one of the most productive uses of time and resources we have today.

 

Technology is so beneficial in many ways, however, its ability to create digital artifacts from archival documents is one of its best uses.  As a society, we interact with textual material on the screen more than printed material. Therefore, having archives digitized is simply more practical for viewing purposes. Similarly, it seems that our physical and emotional relationships to our objects of study have changed in this digital age. People seem to be less connected to or emotionally invested in things that are digital. There is some type of barrier that comes along with viewing content digitally versus through printed text. While converting archival documents to digitized materials is superior for mass viewing, it does not supplant our need to view the physical originals. Anyone who is serious in studying the matter or understanding it more thoroughly should definitely still view the physical originals due to the innate differences in viewing. I think that digital mediums of viewing cannot replace those of physical nature. There is nothing like viewing something first hand. On the contrast, digital mediums can be helpful in pinpointing details of an archive that may have gone overlooked if otherwise been viewed in printed form. This said, I think that it is important to create online reading interfaces that can more closely approximate the experience of reading physical materials.

 

Creating digital artifacts from archival documents is a great aspect of many projects such as “Jane Austen’s Manuscripts”. The manuscripts of Austen’s are very important to preserve. Jane Austen’ work is classic and deserves to live on through the digitized form. “Many of the Austen manuscripts are frail; open and sustained access has long been impossible for conservation and location reasons. Digitization at this stage in their lives not only offers the opportunity for the virtual reunification of a key manuscript resource, it will also be accompanied by a record in as complete a form as possible of the conservation history and current material state of these manuscripts to assist their future conservation.” Austen’s work being digitized is a prime example of the importance of conserving works for the future.

url.jpg

url.jpg