<seg type="senseUnit"> (or "su") was my first thought as well,
although you might also look at <ab> (anonymous block):

"The ab element may be used at the encoder's discretion to mark any
component-level elements in a text for which no other more specific
appropriate markup is defined."

That's described in chapter 16 alongside <seg> though, so you've
probably already looked at it and prefer <seg> (I think I do, too).


On Thu, Jul 30, 2009 at 11:45 AM, John Tone Young<[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> When I was doing an MA in Translation Studies back in the late 1980s,
> the term generally used was 'sense unit'.  This may be very old hat
> now, but it seems to me quite a useful term - precise enough to be
> meaningful but vague enough to cover a broad range of linguistic
> phenomena.  <seg> immediately sprang to my mind as the element you
> were looking for, before I got to the bit where you propose it
> yourself.  <seg type="senseUnit">, perhaps?  Just a thought.
> John
> Quoting Tim Finney <[log in to unmask]>:
>> Dear List Members,
>> I have been thinking about variant textual traditions and a model to
>> represent variant texts. One possibility is that each text is a
>> self-similar structure that can be divided into units at various
>> scales,
>> say book-like, chapter-like, paragraph-like, sentence-like, and
>> "meaning
>> unit" levels. One could continue with more levels at either end
>> (i.e.
>> larger than book and smaller than meaning unit) but this will do for
>> now. In a variant textual tradition, substitutions and
>> transpositions
>> can happen between levels but typically happen at the same level.
>> Thus,
>> it is more common for one chapter to be substituted with another
>> than
>> with, say, a paragraph. By far the most common mode of variation in
>> the
>> material I work with (New Testament) is that one meaning-unit is
>> substituted for another.
>> By "meaning unit", I mean something comprised of one or more words
>> that
>> basically stands apart from its neighbours. If you have enough
>> witnesses
>> in a variant textual tradition, a "meaning unit" has a life of its
>> own.
>> Typically, it's bigger than a word and smaller than a sentence. It
>> might
>> be a phrase or clause but is usually smaller. When many witnesses
>> are
>> compared, the things that happen at one meaning unit are pretty much
>> independent of what happens at adjacent meaning units. If forced to
>> define a meaning unit, I would say in my ignorance that it's a
>> sequence
>> of words that functions as a part of speech; a verb-, adverb-,
>> noun-,
>> adjective-, preposition-, conjunction-, or interjection-like group
>> of
>> words.
>> Now to the point.
>> 1. (Off topic.) For the linguists, what is the right term for the
>> meaning unit thingy? A reference to a standard work would be much
>> appreciated. I found this, which might be what I'm after but I don't
>> know:
> uent.htm
>> 2. (On topic.) What would be an appropriate TEI way to tag a meaning
>> unit thingy?
>> I looked at chap. 17 of the Guidelines and <seg> seems to me the
>> best
>> choice. If so, what would be an appropriate @type to call a "meaning
>> unit" <seg>? If not, what element would you suggest? It would be
>> handy
>> to be able to point to and from it.
>> Best,
>> Tim Finney

Dot Porter (MA, MSLS)          Metadata Manager
Digital Humanities Observatory (RIA), Regus House, 28-32 Upper
Pembroke Street, Dublin 2, Ireland
-- A Project of the Royal Irish Academy --
Phone: +353 1 234 2444        Fax: +353 1 234 2400          Email: [log in to unmask]