Generally, abbreviation stroke (Abkürzungsstrich) or overline  
(Überstrich) - as distinguished from a diacritical macron?

And specifically, nasal stroke (Nasalstrich) and expansion/suspension  
stroke (Expansions-/Suspensionsstrich) resp.?

Franz

Quoting John T Young <[log in to unmask]>:

> Indeed. So I'm still stuck for what to call the similar stroke  
> standing in for a following nasal, either in English or German. Or  
> anything else, for that matter.
>
> John
>
> On 22/02/2012 10:24, Franz Fischer wrote:
>>> At the risk of going slightly off-topic, does anyone know what the  
>>> English for Geminationsstrich *is*? Since being disabused of the  
>>> notion that it was 'macron', I've been struggling to come up with  
>>> something better than 'that line that people call a macron but  
>>> shouldn't'.
>>>
>>> But thanks to Anne I can now at least say it in German.
>>
>> N.B.: 'Geminationsstrich' is a specific abbreviation stroke  
>> indicating the gemination/doubling of the letter underneath - as  
>> distinguished from abbreviation strokes indicating suspension,  
>> contraction, or elision of a nasal.
>>
>> Franz
>>
>>>
>>> John
>>>
>>> On 21/02/2012 17:59, James Cummings wrote:
>>>> As others have said, the use of it as Geminationsstriche seems to  
>>>> me a clear case of it being a marked abbreviation with a  
>>>> well-understood expansion. The choices are:
>>>>
>>>> a) Expand it silently
>>>> b) Leave it encoded in Unicode as an m with a combining macron
>>>> c) Use <g> to point to a <charDecl> with more information
>>>> d) Encode just the <am/> marker
>>>> e) Encode just the <ex> supplied text
>>>> f) Encode a <choice> with an <abbr> and <expan>, the first  
>>>> containing the version with the <am> the latter containing the  
>>>> version with the <ex>
>>>>
>>>> I would argue that a) and b) are poor practice (sorry Paul)  
>>>> because silently expanding things is just wrong and it is a  
>>>> suspension mark not a macron. c) is ok, but probably not really  
>>>> what you want. d) and e) are also ok, just an editorial decision.  
>>>>  My favourite, obviously, would be to have it fully marked up as  
>>>> in f).
>>>>
>>>> Perhaps something like
>>>>
>>>> <choice>
>>>> <abbr>So<am>m̄</am>er</abbr>
>>>> <expan>So<ex>mm</ex>er</abbr>
>>>> </choice>
>>>>
>>>> Part of it comes down to whether editorially you view the 'm with  
>>>> a bar above it' as a single abbreviation marker which is replaced  
>>>> by two characters, or whether you view the first 'm' as being  
>>>> there and just marked with a bar above it.  In the example above  
>>>> I'm treating the m with bar above it (apologies if your mail  
>>>> client doesn't render that unicode properly) as a single  
>>>> abbreviation marker that is replaced by the editorially-supplied  
>>>> expansion of two m's.
>>>>
>>>> Depending on the nature of your data, an XSLT stylesheet that  
>>>> reads in your existing XML, finds any m's or n's that have been  
>>>> marked this way and wraps the orthographic (whitespace or  
>>>> punctuation separated) words into a markup structure as above  
>>>> would be fairly straightforward to write (depending on how much  
>>>> interspersed markup there is).  That kind of automated  
>>>> up-conversion should usually be done before adding lots of other  
>>>> manual markup.
>>>>
>>>> -James
>>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>



-- 
Dr. des. Franz Fischer
Cologne Center for eHumanities / Thomas-Institut
Universität zu Köln, Universitätsstr. 22, D-50923 Köln
Telefon: +49 - (0)221 - 470 - 6883/1750
Email: [log in to unmask]

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://www.cceh.uni-koeln.de/
http://www.i-d-e.de/
http://www.thomasinstitut.uni-koeln.de/
http://ti-intern.uni-koeln.de/sdoe/
http://confessio.ie/