Print

Print


Yes I mostly meant transliteration though I have rather strict ideas on
what constitutes a transliteration. In fact I use italics for the usual
normalizing romanization, for example when mentioning words regardless of
their native, but additionally use a non-normalizing romanization when
discussing native spelling, but then I also use the native glyphs
occasionally, which introduces a third level which I'd like to distinguish.
I guess it is actually the middle (non-normalizing romanization) level
which is in question. My idea right now is to either use bold or bold
italics for the middle level and angle brackets for the native-glyphs
level, or angle brackets for the middle level and double angle brackets for
the native-glyphs level. Unfortunately the native glyphs are not all
distinctive enough from Latin letters to leave them unmarked.

/bpj


Den 1 jun 2017 15:23 skrev "Nathan Sanders" <[log in to unmask]>:

> I've never encountered the notion of angle brackets being used for (let
> alone restricted to) transcription. Do you mean transliteration?  If so,
> I've seen angle brackets used for both the original letters and their
> transliterations (in the same sentence), since both are intended to be
> written.
>
> If you are indicating something from the mouth, use square brackets (or
> slashes if you're doing a particular brand of phonological analysis that
> has phonemes).  If you are indicating something from the written page, use
> angle brackets.
>
> When all else fails, you can use italics, which is the general marker for
> mentioning, rather than using, any linguistic object.  Angle brackets
> really aren't used all that consistently for indicating writing; italics is
> often used instead.
>
> Note also that if the orthography you are describing is sufficiently
> visually distinct from the surrounding orthography used for the description
> (as in an English discussion about cuneiform or Devanagari), extra
> decoration like brackets and italics are often not necessary. The main
> point of any of these types of decoration is to visually signal to the
> reader that the string in question plays a special role in the surrounding
> prose, but the switch from one orthography to another may be enough of a
> signal.
>
> Be careful about trying too hard to analyze writing with an emic/etic
> distinction equivalent to spoken language.  Scholars of writing often argue
> against this, and some even admonish against using the term "grapheme" at
> all (this is a particular bugaboo of Peter Daniels; see, for example, his
> chapter on "Writing Systems" in the Blackwell Handbook of Linguistics
> (2003)).
>
> Nathan
>
>
> > On Jun 1, 2017, at 8:28 AM, Melroch <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> >
> > I'm writing a piece on spelling where I mention the graphemes of a
> writing
> > system both in romanization, mostly, and in the original script when
> > discussing specific letter forms. I'm clear that I should put
> romanization
> > in angle brackets when discussing spelling, since I feel that angle
> > brackets are for *graphemic transcription* just like square brackets are
> > for phonetic transcription and slashes are for phonemic transcription.
> The
> > question is what I should do when using the actual original letter
> forms? I
> > feel that since that is not *transcription* angle brackets would be out
> of
> > place. At the same time I feel that I should mark them somehow. I'm
> leaning
> > towards boldface, since I believe there is some precedent for that, but I
> > also believe I actually have seen angle brackets used in such cases. I'm
> > considering using double angle brackets since using a font reproducing
> the
> > original letter forms, rather than including images of actual original
> > forms whether fictional or not, might be seen as a narrow graphemic
> > transcription, but the fact is that I feel that I should use something
> > different entirely for what I feel is "graphetic transcription", although
> > I'm painfully aware that I coined that term myself.
> >
> > Can anyone point to any actual (scholarly) precedent or offer any advice?
> > Seeing what others do and others think will probably help me make up my
> > mind.
> >
> > /bpj
>