Tag: transcription

Categories
Blog #4

Blog #4: Markup

We have done different type of reading on the same text and each time, there is more information being extracted. For the markup project, we conducted a very close reading and attempted to identify specific things, such as names, places, dates, events, etc. This project required more collaboration than ones before since we all had to agree on what to tag and what not to. As mentioned by Pierazzo, two readers could have two different interpretations of the same text. To solve this issue, we discussed as a group and formed rules/guidelines using Google Docs on what should and should not be tagged. There were no disputes amongst the group after this. Collaborating on this project was necessary since it helped eliminate the bias of having only one person work on the whole project.

The close reading required for this project allowed me to see more details about Samuel Tippett’s life. An important event in his life is his father’s death when he is young. This helps as readers understand Tippett even more. It also allows us to look at other people who were a part of his life, locations he travelled throughout his life and how he conveyed his emotions. We went more in depth during this project than we did during the initial transcription, as the transcription was just a private edition. This markup publication helps us get closer to the diplomatic edition that was mentioned in the reading, where we try to recreate and digitalize the initial text. It is not yet a perfect diplomatic as it is missing many of the ‘facts’ but it provides much more than the raw texts that comes with just transcribing and we have the option to change the codes of the XML file to make it look similar to the original text.

Going through the text word by word to determine the markup necessary then reading the context of that specific word, phrase or sentence helps us engage with the text. It is not just mindless reading, we actually had to engage with the text to figure out what needed to be tagged and what did not. The most difficult part of this project was deciding what to tag, such as do we mark any of pronouns that refer to God or Jesus as a person name, we decided not to. There were emotions and events that our group deemed too vague to be tagged. After marking up the texts, we compiled it as an HTML file, making it look similar to a webpage.

Categories
Blog #4

Blog #4

According to the article, “A Rationale of Digital Documentary Editions” by Elena Pierazzo, transcribing and editing to publish a digital edition are two separate processes. On page 2 of the article, Pierazzo says transcription is “ a derivative document that holds a relationship with the transcribed document, and [a digital edition is] a formal (public) presentation of such a derivative document.” These two products are also different from the original print because “they are intrinsically different with respect to traditional editorial models, especially those editions encoded according to the Guidelines of the Text Encoding Initiative (TEI)” (1). To think about it in terms of order, the print is the original source and is edited with pen and paper. And because of technology, transcriptions can be made online which digital editions edit and present.

Marking up the transcription of the Latrobe memoir has enabled me to do close reading and understand the text enough to analyze Latrobe’s emotions and social relationships. Having to tag keywords like emotions, names, places, and dates made reading the memoir easier to understand since I had to interpret myself what words would be considered such keywords. In order to interpret it, I had to understand her experiences. Thus, “the process of selection is inevitably an interpretative act: what we choose to represent and what we do not depends either on the particular vision that we have of a particular manuscript or on practical constraints” (3). Based on my understanding, I had to choose which words would be considered emotions, places, etc, and thus my judgement and selection was how I interpreted the text. Not only did I have to decide on my own to some extent, but I also had to work with my group to set general standards and “informed choices on what to include because it is relevant and what can be safely omitted in features [like] semantics: dates, names of people, of places, keywords” (5). The hardest keyword categories for us were emotions and people because Esther Latrobe had experienced many hardships concerning sickness and she came from a prominent, religious family so her journal entries included a lot of expressions of pain and religious jargon like “Lamb of God”, “All in All”, “Son of God”. It was difficult to create specific standards for emotional expressions and names for God since they were not just singular words but phrases so it was tricky to define whether or not just the adjectives or nouns would be tagged. In the end, our group decided to tag entire phrases for emotion (including pain) and capitalized names for God whom we decided to count as a “person”. There were not any arguments in my group regarding the rule of thumb we made. We just constantly communicated with each other what we were tagging in our own sections of the memoir. The process of editing the transcription taught me that there is no objective rule we can follow to edit without bias or opinions. Pierazzo says, “we must have limits, and limits represent the boundaries within which the hermeneutic process can develop. The challenge is therefore to select those limits that allow a model which is adequate to the scholarly purpose for which it has been created” (5). Because editors cannot be objective, it is best to accept that and focus on interpreting transcriptions based on knowledge and informative decisions.

Categories
Blog #4

Mark Ups

        My group is transcribing writing from 18th century Moravian culture. If you were to look at my digital transcription and the original hand written document they would look incredibly different. Tanselle explains, “Obviously a transcription cannot exactly reproduce the relative precision of carelessness with which handwritten letters are formed or their relative sizes, or the amount of space between words and lines” (465). This point that no transcription will ever look exactly like the original document is important to keep in mind when observing my group’s specific transcription. My group of four people divided up the pages of Samuel Tippett’s memoir and each transcribed four or five pages. The fact that transcriptions cannot perfectly represent the original document implies that there is a lot of room for discrepancies when transcribing the same text. This means that even though my group is transcribing the same story, the way in which I approached and understood my pages is most likely very different  from the way the approached and understood theirs. Pierazzo further supports this point by explaining, “The process of selection is inevitably an interpretive act: what we choose to represent and what we do not depends either on the particular vision that we have of a particular manuscript or on practical constraints” (465). When we went back to our transcription and began the process of mark ups, it provided us with a way of linking our texts together both logically and stylistically.

        When deciding how we wanted to mark up our transcription the hardest element was keeping everything consistent. Michael Hunter explains, “An electronic edition is like an iceberg, with far more data potentially available than is actually visible on the screen, and this is at the same time a great opportunity and a temptation to overdo things” (467). Having the meeting to go over our guildlines was important to make sure our pages matched. The two hardest elements to keep consistent were deciding how we would mark dates and emotions.  Dates were presented to us in a few different ways. Sometimes we would be given a date saying “In the year 1754”. Other times, it was presented without the word year in front of the date, and the final way included the day and month. Eventually, we decided that in our mark ups of dates we would include months, days, and years (like 1754) and we would leave out the word year or years in the mark up. That was a simple decision, but the decision on how we would mark up emotions was much more complicated. Constantly throughout our memoir, Samuel Tippett used words and phrases like, “love”, “heart have felt”, “something in my heart”. All of these phrases seem as if they are portraying emotion, but we did not decide to tag all of them. We decided that we would only tag words, classified as emotions, which are directly related to Tippet himself. This allowed us to not go crazy in our task to tag emotions.

                

Categories
Blog #4

Blog #4

Through marking up my memoir and rereading it multiple times, I was able to gain a better understanding of the main topics Elizabeth Grundy was trying to portray throughout. In the process of adding tags on certain words, I was able to determine the most frequently used tags; Elizabeth Grundy used people and role names frequently in her memoir. As stated by Pierazzo, “a digital edition can represent many more features than a print publication can,” (Pierazzo 472). She spoke often of her son and some form of God. By doing this, I was able to come up with an idea of the important things in her life; she always made her son a priority and focused on religion everyday. Although the web provides all of these features, sometimes it still lacks features only printed texts can provide. Pierazzo says, “the web has some limitations: we cannot, for instance, reproduce easily some of the calligrammes,” (Pierazzo 472).

In the beginning of the transcription process it was easy to divide up the pages that everyone was assigned to transcribe. Each group member was responsible for 5-6 pages, and every member had their transcriptions finished by the due date. It got harder once we were each assigned with adding tags to our transcribed pages. This part was confusing at first and involved a lot of talk among my group members and I. One member was absent during the class period when we were finishing the tags and did not have it finished in time for when the final file with everyone’s changes were sent out. I was unsure as to how I was going to receive their changes. After experiencing this, I can imagine working in a much larger group with members across the globe makes it very difficult to compile everyone’s work into one space and make the changes necessary throughout the project. Communication is key when participating in group projects, and in larger projects, it is vital that group members complete tasks by the specific due dates otherwise things begin to get much more confusing than they need to be. After completing this project, I have a better appreciation for edited texts and a better understanding as to how they are produced. I use code for my major constantly, and it was interesting to see one of the many things code can be used for as most of my projects in computer science are very different.

Another difficulty our group faced was the decision involving which words should be given which tags. We spoke in class and created a google doc. This document contained the rules to determine the tags of questionable words. These words related to the different names for God and words similar to son or mother. We decided these names for God would be considered role names and words similar to son and mother would not be considered names. If there was a question a group member had during marking up the memoir, they would ask the group during class, and it was get answered. We did not face any difficult decisions during the mark up. Similar to this, we also had to determine whether or not we would change spellings in the memoir to make them correct. Pierrazo states in her article, “Austen’s favoured spellings have been preserved and marked, such as the inversion of the diphthong,” (Pierazzo 469). When transcribing texts to make them accessible on the web, it is difficult to agree on the many rules each member needs to follow during their transcription.