-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Hi all,

> In transcribing speech for the BNC we had lots of arguments about the
> need to distinguish normalization from correction. For example:
> 
> 1) you're transcribing a speech in which someone says "couldn't of"
> (people do) and you'd like to correct/normalise this to "couldn't have"
> 2) in the transcript someone else made, you think they mis-heard
> "couldn't have" as "couldn't of" (or vice versa)
> 
> The first is a case for <reg> and <orig>. The second is a case for
> <sic>  and <corr>

my understanding was so far:
- - for what is "in the source", use <subst> with sic/corr or orig/reg
pairs as children,
- - for what is editorial intervention use <choice> with sic/corr or
orig/reg pairs as children.

For what Gabriel said, was true in the age of print respectively still
is if the output media is print. But what John said in my opinion is
very much true either, for electronic publication. While in print we
didn't have "modi" to visualize both, one had to arrange things on the
page, in electronic media this is substituted by different modi,
displaying either the original versions (sic, orig etc) or the
normalized/corrected.

Best, Torsten

- --
Torsten Schassan
Herzog August Bibliothek, Postfach 1364, D-38299 Wolfenbuettel
Tel.: +49-5331-808-130, schassan {at} hab.de
  http://www.hab.de; http://www.hab.de/forschung/projekte/weiss64.htm
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.7 (MingW32)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iD8DBQFKYHH0q4nZEP2KS4QRAso4AJ4neOTnWm8lGZgQRvjuFAUA74pytwCfey86
a3s69rrRwDVAdKo6GgoX6DU=
=uLEv
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----