User Tools

Site Tools


doc:en:tips

Differences

This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.

Link to this comparison view

Both sides previous revision Previous revision
Next revision
Previous revision
doc:en:tips [2017/03/13 14:54]
rosmord
doc:en:tips [2017/03/13 14:54] (current)
rosmord
Line 8: Line 8:
 You must decide how faithfull to the original you must be, and it's not a simple question. The first point is that you can be sure that your Manuel de Codage text can't be a facsimile, so, one way or another, it will betray the original. If the text is ultimately a hieratic text, you are already creating something completely different anyway. You must decide how faithfull to the original you must be, and it's not a simple question. The first point is that you can be sure that your Manuel de Codage text can't be a facsimile, so, one way or another, it will betray the original. If the text is ultimately a hieratic text, you are already creating something completely different anyway.
  
-Now, when you have a sign, should you look for the most precise variant for it, or use a somehow standardised one? To answer this, you should wonder if this variant is relevant, in the text, and in the use you intend to make of it. For instance, in the Kanaïs texts by Sethi the Ist, the first person pronoun uses many variants of A40 ({{http://​jsesh.qenherkhopeshef.org/​files_jsesh/​images/​A40.png}}). If you intend the text to be for grammatical study, it's not very relevant. If you wonder whether it's a free play to add diversity to the text, then you may take the time to encode the variants. As a rule, **if you are a beginner in Egyptian,** I'd advise you to encode the "​standard"​ sign, as it will force you to read the text, not to copy signs. The problem you have when you want to be very accurate is that you will find many cases of variants which have no encoding anyway, and you take the chances to mislead your readers by giving a false impression of accuracy.+Now, when you have a sign, should you look for the most precise variant for it, or use a somehow standardised one? To answer this, you should wonder if this variant is relevant, in the text, and in the use you intend to make of it. For instance, in the Kanaïs texts by Sethi the Ist, the first person pronoun uses many variants of A40 ({{http://​jsesh.qenherkhopeshef.org/​files_jsesh/​images/​A40.png}}). If you intend the text to be for grammatical study, it's not very relevant. If you wonder whether it's a free play to add diversity to the text, then you may take the time to encode the variants. As a rule, **if you are a beginner in Egyptian,** I'd advise you to encode the "​standard"​ sign, as it will force //you to read the text, not to copy signs//. The problem you have when you want to be very accurate is that you will find many cases of variants which have no encoding anyway, and you take the chances to mislead your readers by giving a false impression of accuracy.
  
 When your source is an handwritten version of a text, like in the Urkunden, beware of one point: unless a sign is very particular, an egyptologist will usually draw his glyphs in the easiest way. That means, for instance, he will use V23A ({{http://​jsesh.qenherkhopeshef.org/​files_jsesh/​images/​V23A.png}}) instead of  {{http://​jsesh.qenherkhopeshef.org/​files_jsesh/​images/​V22.png}} (V22) which is the normal hieroglyphic sign. You must understand that, and when a sign selection is simply caused by the individual hand of the author, render it with the "​standard"​ sign. On the other hand, when the author has drawn a very specific sign form, it might be worthwhile to give it more consideration. When your source is an handwritten version of a text, like in the Urkunden, beware of one point: unless a sign is very particular, an egyptologist will usually draw his glyphs in the easiest way. That means, for instance, he will use V23A ({{http://​jsesh.qenherkhopeshef.org/​files_jsesh/​images/​V23A.png}}) instead of  {{http://​jsesh.qenherkhopeshef.org/​files_jsesh/​images/​V22.png}} (V22) which is the normal hieroglyphic sign. You must understand that, and when a sign selection is simply caused by the individual hand of the author, render it with the "​standard"​ sign. On the other hand, when the author has drawn a very specific sign form, it might be worthwhile to give it more consideration.
doc/en/tips.1489413264.txt.gz · Last modified: 2017/03/13 14:54 by rosmord