I am afraid I have to raise once again the old <q> vs. <quote> vs.
I am tagging direct speech in an Old French manuscript of the Quest of
the Holy Grail.
According to the current Guidelines, <q> is not appropriate, beacause in
the manuscript there are no quotation marks or any other ostensible
graphical marks of these passages.
<said> is fine when the utterance is spoken aloud or thought but I have
a problem with writings on the rocks like this:
et li baron resgardoient les letres qui disoient *ia nus ne m'ostera de
ci se cil non a qui coste ie pendrai...*
(Translation [sorry for my English]: ... and the barons looked at the
letters which were saying *no one will ever pull me out of here but the
one by whose side I will be hanging...*).
The "speaker" here is a sword stuck in the rock. It seems to me that
<said> is more appropriate than <quote> here (the latter does not have
@who and @direct) but I cannot figure out the way to make a distinction
between spoken and written utterances, as <said> (unlike <q>) does not
It seems to me that either the definition of <said> should be refined to
allow the distinction between spoken and written utterances or that the
condition of "ostensible marking" should be removed from the description
of <q> in the Guidelines.