I agree with Anne, I wouldn't rule out <q> or <quote> if the passages
in question are paraphrases of the source rather than direct quotes;
I think it would be useful to broaden the range of these elements and
use type= to distinguish between direct and paraphrased quotations.
This would be handy even in texts which always signal their
quotations explicitly (since authors frequently quote inaccurately).

Having said this, I note that although <q> has type= attribute,
<quote> does not. I find this a puzzling inconsistency--actually, I
think type= should be available on all TEI elements, because one is
always finding cases where one wants it and doesn't have it. (A plea
to the editors for P5!!)

Another useful attribute (as long as you're adding them) would be
source=, which would allow you to indicate the source without using
<bibl>. My only reason for preferring such an approach is that I
think of the encoded content inside elements as always coming from
the text itself, but if you don't preserve that distinction then
<bibl> would be fine.

Julia the obsessive subcategorizer...

>Hi to all TEI-users,
>
>I wonder whether there exists a specific element for intertextuality. By =
>intertextuality, I mean those parts of the text which are not quoted or =
>cited but doesn't really belong to the author of the text. Particularly, =
>I refer to "Tirant Lo Blanc", which is a Catalan novel by Joannot =
>Martorell, where we can easily find lots of fragments which are =
>reproduced (not copied) by the author from other texts without inverted =
>commas, etc. This is, these fragments are embedded as part of the text.
>
>I understand that the <q>, <quote>, <quotation> or <cit> elements are =
>not suitable for this case since it is not a real quotation.
>
>Could anybody throw some light on this point?
>
>Thank you very much in advance.
>
>Manuel