Greetings,
There has been a great question which has caused some consternation over several years as to the identity of the writer of Shakespeare's works. This entry in the blog is not designed to give an answer to this particular riddle, or even give my own particular thoughts on the matter. What will be laid before you is approaching this question from a different point of view.
One of the first accusations with regard to Shakespeare's works is whether or not it was written by one man, or whether it was written by many writers, resulting in the question of whether it is "Shakespeare's English" or "Shakespeares' English". This is a question which historians and many others have argued. If it was written by one man, then he is truly a great man and has given us a great wealth of works. But, even if it was written by multiple authors, the result may be spread over several but still there is a lot of information and value to be gained from the works as they are.
Assuming that the works were all written by one man, the question of the man is one which has also appeared as voraciously as the question of whether it was one or several authors. Was it the son of a glove-maker from Stratford-Upon-Avon or was it Edward de Vere, Earl of Oxford? These are the two great contenders for the authorship. Evidence has been presented from both points of view supporting both men. Once again, regardless of which one of these men wrote the works, the result is the same.
In essence it does not matter whether it was one author or several, the son of a glove-maker or an Earl which wrote "The works of Shakespeare", the true value is found in the volume of the work produced and in the works themselves. The plays give us many things which need to be appreciated for what they are rather than who put pen and ink to paper to produce them. The increased lexicon as a result of Shakespeare's works is of great significance as has been indicated previously. Expressions of language found in Shakespeare's works are still found in film, and even everyday speech. In close examination of the plays we find demonstrations of other cultures of the period, specifically the Italian which gives us an insight as to how society worked in that period in that culture. Even in general examination of the historical plays we find elements of the social and political workings of the day that they were written and also a perspective of historical events. All of these elements are of great use to us in the modern era.
For the most part, the question of the authorship of "The Works of Shakespeare" is more of an historical argument more designed for those who want specific answers about specific things. Regardless of who wrote the works the impact of them upon the English language and indeed the culture of English-speaking people far outweighs any argument as to the authorship of the works themselves. Indeed even if it is found that the works were not written by the son of a glove-maker from Stratford-Upon-Avon, there is still much value to be found in the fiction, and more to the point much value to be found in the works themselves.
Cheers,
Henry.
P.S. For all of my regular readers, the production continues. Slowly, but it does continue.
Showing posts with label lexicon. Show all posts
Showing posts with label lexicon. Show all posts
Monday, November 18, 2013
Tuesday, November 12, 2013
Production Commenced!
Greetings,
I have been going on with this research now for about 3 years, and for the most part, to this current date, the research has come to an end. What does this mean? No more blogs? End of the series? No actually, I think that there will be more blogs in this series as I continue to learn more about the language. For me it means something much bigger.
The bigger thing is that I have started production of my "period" manual. This is a manual based on my own acquired fencing knowledge, written in Present Day English (PDE) and then "translated" into Elizabethan English (EE). The reason for this project has already been discussed in some of my earliest posts on this blog, however, it could be useful to give a reminder.
One of the things that I have noticed studying Historical European Martial Arts is that there are a lot of practitioners who, especially in their earlier years, are afraid of going near sources of the period they are studying. For the most part this is due to fear of the language and the differences, this is even the case when discussing those manuals which are written in English, admittedly earlier versions, but still English. This project was designed to address at least part of that problem.
There are three significant treatises which were written in the 1590s: Vincentio Saviolo's (1595) His Practice in Two Books, Giacomo di Grassi's (1594) His True Arte of Defence and finally George Silver's (1599) Paradoxes of Defense. Interestingly these are written in EE, but English nonetheless. My choice was to examine EE of the 1590's in order that I could understand these manuals better, as a result "translate" a manual from PDE to EE and present them side-by-side in order that the EE may be more accessible due to the lack of "noise" between the two manuals.
"Noise" is what happens when something is translated from one language to another, and across a time period does count. This is because the person in the modern period who is translating the older text is not the author and as such does not know exactly what the author's intent was in the writing. This results in "noise" which can reduce understanding of the original and result in misinterpretations of the intent of the original author. By writing both of the manuals it is my intent to reduce this "noise" as much as I can.
I expect that this project will take some time to complete. There will no doubt be updates, and possibly even a preview of my work presented here, for those who are interested. I am expecting at least two versions if not more in order to get this as correct as I can. I am also expecting quite a few bumps and blocks in the process of this production, but I feel that the end result will be worth the effort put in.
Cheers,
Henry.
I have been going on with this research now for about 3 years, and for the most part, to this current date, the research has come to an end. What does this mean? No more blogs? End of the series? No actually, I think that there will be more blogs in this series as I continue to learn more about the language. For me it means something much bigger.
The bigger thing is that I have started production of my "period" manual. This is a manual based on my own acquired fencing knowledge, written in Present Day English (PDE) and then "translated" into Elizabethan English (EE). The reason for this project has already been discussed in some of my earliest posts on this blog, however, it could be useful to give a reminder.
One of the things that I have noticed studying Historical European Martial Arts is that there are a lot of practitioners who, especially in their earlier years, are afraid of going near sources of the period they are studying. For the most part this is due to fear of the language and the differences, this is even the case when discussing those manuals which are written in English, admittedly earlier versions, but still English. This project was designed to address at least part of that problem.
There are three significant treatises which were written in the 1590s: Vincentio Saviolo's (1595) His Practice in Two Books, Giacomo di Grassi's (1594) His True Arte of Defence and finally George Silver's (1599) Paradoxes of Defense. Interestingly these are written in EE, but English nonetheless. My choice was to examine EE of the 1590's in order that I could understand these manuals better, as a result "translate" a manual from PDE to EE and present them side-by-side in order that the EE may be more accessible due to the lack of "noise" between the two manuals.
"Noise" is what happens when something is translated from one language to another, and across a time period does count. This is because the person in the modern period who is translating the older text is not the author and as such does not know exactly what the author's intent was in the writing. This results in "noise" which can reduce understanding of the original and result in misinterpretations of the intent of the original author. By writing both of the manuals it is my intent to reduce this "noise" as much as I can.
I expect that this project will take some time to complete. There will no doubt be updates, and possibly even a preview of my work presented here, for those who are interested. I am expecting at least two versions if not more in order to get this as correct as I can. I am also expecting quite a few bumps and blocks in the process of this production, but I feel that the end result will be worth the effort put in.
Cheers,
Henry.
Thursday, October 31, 2013
Language Rules Based on Personal Research
Greetings,
What is presented below is my list of rules, actually more accurately conventions, for spelling and word forms in the Elizabethan language. There are some important points which must be made before this is presented in order to clarify what is presented below.
The first point is that I do understand that there is research already done on this particular subject in a more general way. However, this research is clearly focused on the specific time period, dialect and form of the language which is presented, thus I believe that in some ways this presents a clearer picture of this specific part of the language.
The second point is that all of the research presented below is based upon the words presented in my lexicon of the language rather than any external sources. What this means is that this is based on a selection of the language rather than the entirety of it. This means that the rules are more specific to the language presented in the lexicon rather than any part which is not.
The third point is that these rules are, for the most part, presented in note form rather than paragraphs about the elements. This is important as any misunderstandings must be re-read and remembered that they are based upon what is presented.
Finally it is this set of rules and the lexicon on which I will be basing the final project upon which all of the research up to this point in time is based. It is hoped that with this information a reasonably accurate representation of the Elizabethan language of the 1590's will be formed and presented.
What is presented below is my list of rules, actually more accurately conventions, for spelling and word forms in the Elizabethan language. There are some important points which must be made before this is presented in order to clarify what is presented below.
The first point is that I do understand that there is research already done on this particular subject in a more general way. However, this research is clearly focused on the specific time period, dialect and form of the language which is presented, thus I believe that in some ways this presents a clearer picture of this specific part of the language.
The second point is that all of the research presented below is based upon the words presented in my lexicon of the language rather than any external sources. What this means is that this is based on a selection of the language rather than the entirety of it. This means that the rules are more specific to the language presented in the lexicon rather than any part which is not.
The third point is that these rules are, for the most part, presented in note form rather than paragraphs about the elements. This is important as any misunderstandings must be re-read and remembered that they are based upon what is presented.
Finally it is this set of rules and the lexicon on which I will be basing the final project upon which all of the research up to this point in time is based. It is hoped that with this information a reasonably accurate representation of the Elizabethan language of the 1590's will be formed and presented.
Elizabethan Language – Own Research
Foundation
Above all rules below, phonetic spelling of word is greatest
consideration, rules then phonetics. The spelling was founded in speaking the
words and thus the phonetics are most considered, following this would be the
rules below, most of which are founded more in the typesetting of the print
than actual spelling.
Most important of all these rules apply to printed works
rather than hand-written or spoken texts, hence the importance of typesetting
in the rules. Of note is also that this is for the London Dialect of
Elizabethan English of the decade of the 1590s.
Use of “S”
General
Capitals always stay as “S”
“s” at end of word, or before punctuation mark e.g.
“abus’de”
“Significant” words begin with “s” e.g. “skil” and “skirmiſh” most likely for emphasis
Use “ſ” in
middle of word, or at the beginning of the word, not generally at the end
Specific instances of use will follow
Not replaced where “s” is before “f”, i.e. “-sf”
Plurals
Simple case of the addition of “-s” to the end of the root
word, very few exceptions to this rule
Plural form of “-f” to “-ves” e.g. “wolf – wolves” remains
the same
Plural form of “-y” to “ies” is followed in some
circumstances and not others, in some cases the “-y” remains and followed with
“-es”, some of this could be due to the “i” to “y” and vice versa convention.
Possessives
Absence of apostrophe to mark ownership
Plural conventions used for the addition of “-s”
No difference between singular and plural ownership
indicators
Double “S”
In most instances a double “s” will have both changed to
“long s”
Some instances a double “s” the first is changed the second
is not i.e. “ſs”
No clear convention as to when the change is or is not made,
however it is most common when followed by “-ing” or “-ion” or “-ity” ending
More than likely a typesetting rather than spelling
convention
-ness
Two common endings “-nes” and “neſſe”
Both endings may be used on the same word
Typesetting rather than spelling convention
-less
Two common endings “-les” and “leſſe”
Both endings may be used on the same word
Typesetting rather than spelling convention
“S” and “C”
Phonetic spelling, change between “s” and “c” in the
spelling is not constant, it is an individual determination
Also instances of additional change in words to accommodate
change in spelling e.g. “decide” to “diſcide”.
“S” and “Z”
Both interchangeable in most instances
“s” in modern may be “z” in Elizabethan or vice versa
In most instances the consideration is phonetic rather than
a typesetting consideration as there is evidence of other letters changing to
accommodate the letter.
“E”
Some words have an extra “e” placed on the end, only after a
consonant, possibly to extend the sound of a vowel or vowels in the middle of
the word, most likely a typesetting consideration
“E” and “I”
Change from “em-” to “im-” and also “en-” to “in-”, for
phonetic considerations
Also evidence of no change in some words with the these
beginnings
Some change of “e” and “i” in the middle of words for
phonetic change, however this does not always occur, could be typesetting or
phonetic cause.
“I” and “Y”
Conventions not solid for the most part, very flexible in
the use of the conventions. More likely to be typesetting conventions than
spelling conventions
“i” to “y” in middle of word, not always, a vowel before is
common
“y” to “i” in middle of word, rare but present
“ie” to “y” at end of word, not always
“y” to “ie” at end of word, not always
“y” to “ye” at end of word, not always
“J” and “I”
“j” to “i” in the middle of words, most instances
Roman numerals – last “i” to “j”
“j” to “i” at beginning of words, most instances, especially
where a capital
(more research required: not distinct due to Latin
derivation)
“L”
May be doubled where single in modern spelling, applies to
middle as well as the end
May be single where doubled in modern spelling, especially
in cases where a plural is formed, or ending added. Cases for both middle and
end of word.
“U” and “V”
“v” to “u” in the middle of a word e.g. above – aboue
“v” remains unchanged at the beginning of the word
“u” to “v” changed at the beginning of a word
“u” remains unchanged in the middle of a word
The exception is in the title of a piece in which “u” is
changed to “v” in the title where it is placed in capitals of any form
“W”
Instances of “vv” instead of “w” very much interchangeable
Typesetting consideration rather than any spelling, ligature
or single letter used
Verb Forms
“To Do”
Both “-s” and “-eth” forms used on words
Some verbs may use different endings
Some instances of “-est” rather than “-eth”
Both forms used, newer form is less prevalent than older
form, but increasing in presence
Archaic Endings
The archaic forms of verbs are present in the language, but
are increasingly losing ground to more modern forms of the words
The form of the language depends in the subject and author
As with many spellings, many of these are dependent on
typesetting as much as anything else
“-ed”, “-d” and “-t”
The past tense ending “-ed” may be replaced by “-d”, “-‘d”
or “-t”
In some instances it may also be replaced by “-de”
The use of “-t” is mostly phonetic following “sh”, “ch” or
“k”
While mostly phonetic there is an element of typesetting
consideration present in this convention
Simple addition for past tense of word
Truncated Words
Truncations otherwise unspecified below are to do with
spelling conventions of words, or lack thereof in most instances rather than
deliberate truncation of words for a purpose.
Use of ~
Truncation using tilde (~) is for the replacement of “n” or
“m”
The previous vowel has the tilde above it.
The replacement of “n” is more common than “m”
In the case of a double “m” or “n” the vowel before has the
tilde and then it is followed by a single “m” or “n” depending on the word
No definitive choice where there is more than one either “m”
or “n” in the word, this is clearly more of a typesetting choice for even lines
in the document than any spelling or pronunciation factors
The vowel “i” is not used for vowel for truncation, other
vowels all are
The most common vowels are “e” and “o”
Truncation using tilde is used both in the middle of words
and also at the end
Use of ‘
Primary truncation is the removal of “e” in “ed” words
Other words truncated, primarily removal of “e”, but also
“i” or “v” in “over-“ words
“E” sometimes accompanied by consonant in removal
Primary purpose is typesetting in prose, thus little to do
with pronunciation or spelling, however can be used to change pronunciation and
rhythm in poems and plays
“-ered” to “-red”
The removal of “e” following a consonant with past tense use
e.g. “dismembered” to “dismembred”.
In some cases an apostrophe is used, as previously
indicated, but in most cases it is not
This truncation is most likely due to typesetting, but does
also change pronunciation
Ending Doubles
Double consonant at end of words in some cases. Short words ending in vowels extended by doubling phonetic
compatible consonant. Ending doubles are more typesetting than spelling
consideration, extending words in order to keep the ends of the lines even.
I hope that this is of use to people in their own endeavours. I considered cleaning this up and presenting it better, but decided that it is better presented as it is rather than in more formal language. These are rather loose rules of the language and should be used with some knowledge of more formal rules presented in reputable sources. It is only through the examination of the language ourselves that we can really get a feel for it, rather than simply following along with rules and theories presented by others. Needless to say that I will be using the rules presented here along with research already presented to present the language in a close form to what it would have been in the period.
Cheers,
Henry.
Monday, October 28, 2013
Lexicon Update and Research Update
Greetings,
In my last post I posted a link to my newly created lexicon for the 1590s, well I have had another look through this document and made some changes, some subtle, some not so subtle. As a result there is a new version available for your interest. This newer version is available here: https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/32538238/Lexicon%20V2.pdf This document is free to use as reference material, however it would be appreciated if due credit was given where it is due for the origination of this document as there is several years invested in it.
I have been in the process of discovering rules about the spelling of the language and how the words were used. I do realise that much of this research has already been completed for Early Modern English and also Elizabethan English, however I decided that I needed such research done for the particular time and dialect which is the focus of the study. The result of this will be some elements which are very much the same as what has already been posted here, and there will also no doubt be some areas in which there are elements which are unique to the time and dialect which has been chosen. I will probably post this new research in blocks in order to keep up to date here, however this is a consideration dependent on how the research proceeds.
This a short post merely for updating how things are proceeding in the research. I am hoping to present something more substantial soon. I dare not place a time estimate on this due to the nature of the research being conducted. I hope that the next update will be sooner rather than later.
Cheers,
Henry.
In my last post I posted a link to my newly created lexicon for the 1590s, well I have had another look through this document and made some changes, some subtle, some not so subtle. As a result there is a new version available for your interest. This newer version is available here: https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/32538238/Lexicon%20V2.pdf This document is free to use as reference material, however it would be appreciated if due credit was given where it is due for the origination of this document as there is several years invested in it.
I have been in the process of discovering rules about the spelling of the language and how the words were used. I do realise that much of this research has already been completed for Early Modern English and also Elizabethan English, however I decided that I needed such research done for the particular time and dialect which is the focus of the study. The result of this will be some elements which are very much the same as what has already been posted here, and there will also no doubt be some areas in which there are elements which are unique to the time and dialect which has been chosen. I will probably post this new research in blocks in order to keep up to date here, however this is a consideration dependent on how the research proceeds.
This a short post merely for updating how things are proceeding in the research. I am hoping to present something more substantial soon. I dare not place a time estimate on this due to the nature of the research being conducted. I hope that the next update will be sooner rather than later.
Cheers,
Henry.
Monday, October 7, 2013
Lexicon Complete and Update
Greetings,
The Elizabethan Lexicon which I have been working on as a partner to the language project which is found here, and I have indicated is complete, or at least in its first version. If you are interested in accessing this document for your own personal use it can be accessed here:
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/32538238/Lexicon%20V1.pdf
With this part of the project completed for the most part, at least for now, it is possible to examine the words found within the lexicon for commonalities. Through these commonalities "rules" should emerge as to the spellings of them, and also the forms of the words. These can then form "rules" which could allow for the "translation" of Modern to Elizabethan English.
As the language, as indicated in previous posts, was in a process of change these "rules" can only be very general. While these rules may only a general indication as to the form of the words of the language, it is still useful to get an overall understanding of the forms of the words and how they are constructed. Some of these rules have already been indicated in previous posts on this blog, however, I feel it is important that I do my own discovery of the rules as the ones which I have found. These rules will also be more specific to the lexicon as it is presented rather than Early Modern English or Elizabethan English, as broad background reference points.
Once I have more information with regard to these rules and their form and complexity, this will make the decision as to whether I will publish these rules as individual posts or as a single complete post. The second version of the lexicon may also include these rules as part of the reference material found within it. Needless to say, either way that it goes, some form of these rules will be found on these pages.
Cheers,
Henry.
The Elizabethan Lexicon which I have been working on as a partner to the language project which is found here, and I have indicated is complete, or at least in its first version. If you are interested in accessing this document for your own personal use it can be accessed here:
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/32538238/Lexicon%20V1.pdf
With this part of the project completed for the most part, at least for now, it is possible to examine the words found within the lexicon for commonalities. Through these commonalities "rules" should emerge as to the spellings of them, and also the forms of the words. These can then form "rules" which could allow for the "translation" of Modern to Elizabethan English.
As the language, as indicated in previous posts, was in a process of change these "rules" can only be very general. While these rules may only a general indication as to the form of the words of the language, it is still useful to get an overall understanding of the forms of the words and how they are constructed. Some of these rules have already been indicated in previous posts on this blog, however, I feel it is important that I do my own discovery of the rules as the ones which I have found. These rules will also be more specific to the lexicon as it is presented rather than Early Modern English or Elizabethan English, as broad background reference points.
Once I have more information with regard to these rules and their form and complexity, this will make the decision as to whether I will publish these rules as individual posts or as a single complete post. The second version of the lexicon may also include these rules as part of the reference material found within it. Needless to say, either way that it goes, some form of these rules will be found on these pages.
Cheers,
Henry.
Wednesday, September 25, 2013
The End of the Collection Process
Greetings,
Having completed the collection process for de Loque's (1591) Discourses of War and Single Combat, I have come to the conclusion that with the six period sources of various types that I have used, that the lexicon is suitably complete. I do understand that there are more sources from the 1590s that could be included in the lexicon, however at this stage, in order to move forward with the overall project, I think that the lexicon is suitably complete. There are 98 pages of lexemes present in the lexicon, covering some approximately 5,000 lexemes, some with more than one spelling of the word. I believe that this lexicon, while it could continue to increase is suitably large to cover the period of the 1590s at this stage.
The procedure in order to move forward at this stage is to assemble the lexicon, adding the glossary and some secondary sourced lexemes along with their appropriate sources to be added to the bibliography. These will be included with appropriate explanations for the sources of the words and how they were come about. This lexicon will require some explanation as to its set-up and processes and as such the appropriate introductions and conclusions for the various parts of the lexicon. Once this is complete then further study of the language will be required.
The dream or ultimate goal in this process is to eventually attain rules for spelling, grammar and punctuation in order that the English language of the 1590s can be produced in some fashion, and being a reasonable replica of this language. Much of this information has been supplied in the various investigations which have been presented, but these need to be formed in to a more usable format for the practical elements of the language to be accessible, and thus the ability to create language in a suitable fashion or at least a good facsimile of the language. This being the case it is hoped that more frequent updates will be possible.
Cheers,
Henry.
Having completed the collection process for de Loque's (1591) Discourses of War and Single Combat, I have come to the conclusion that with the six period sources of various types that I have used, that the lexicon is suitably complete. I do understand that there are more sources from the 1590s that could be included in the lexicon, however at this stage, in order to move forward with the overall project, I think that the lexicon is suitably complete. There are 98 pages of lexemes present in the lexicon, covering some approximately 5,000 lexemes, some with more than one spelling of the word. I believe that this lexicon, while it could continue to increase is suitably large to cover the period of the 1590s at this stage.
The procedure in order to move forward at this stage is to assemble the lexicon, adding the glossary and some secondary sourced lexemes along with their appropriate sources to be added to the bibliography. These will be included with appropriate explanations for the sources of the words and how they were come about. This lexicon will require some explanation as to its set-up and processes and as such the appropriate introductions and conclusions for the various parts of the lexicon. Once this is complete then further study of the language will be required.
The dream or ultimate goal in this process is to eventually attain rules for spelling, grammar and punctuation in order that the English language of the 1590s can be produced in some fashion, and being a reasonable replica of this language. Much of this information has been supplied in the various investigations which have been presented, but these need to be formed in to a more usable format for the practical elements of the language to be accessible, and thus the ability to create language in a suitable fashion or at least a good facsimile of the language. This being the case it is hoped that more frequent updates will be possible.
Cheers,
Henry.
Monday, July 8, 2013
Collection Process
Greetings,
I thought it would be useful to describe my collection technique for the words which I am putting into my lexicon. This will enable people to understand the process of word collection and see that I am not just collecting them from random sources claiming to be from the correct period. The process which follows has four steps involved in it.
The first step is to select the source from which the words are to come. The original stipulation for documents to qualify was that they had to come from the period of Elizabeth I's reign, however I have refined things a little more an am only using sources from the 1590's for a little more focus. In this document selection I aim to get as close to the original document as possible. A pdf format facsimile of the original is the best in this particular instance even if the readability is a little lacking in places.
The second step is to extract the words from the document. A special note needs to be made here that I am only extracting those words which are spelled differently from their modern counter-parts, have a different meaning from their modern counter-parts, or are what would be called "difficult" words, those which for the modern audience would cause issue. These words are first recorded in a hard-copy form, written to paper. First in a book and then on loose-leaf paper. The former for collection, the second to start collation. Once the two hard-copies are made they are then recorded in alphabetical order electronically under the title of the document. This is the longest part of the process.
The third step in the is to integrate these words into the lexicon, remembering to highlight those "difficult" words which have been found in the search. These words are stored alphabetically by the modern word. Once this process has been completed then I look for the definitions of the "difficult" words and those with different meanings additional or separate from their modern ones. These meanings are stored to be added into the lexicon later on.
This is a process which takes quite some time, hence this project continuing as long as it has. It is also for this reason that my updates which have been printed recently have such large gaps between them. Regardless, I hope that due to the time taken with this process that a reasonably accurate recording of the words from the period is made.
Cheers,
Henry.
I thought it would be useful to describe my collection technique for the words which I am putting into my lexicon. This will enable people to understand the process of word collection and see that I am not just collecting them from random sources claiming to be from the correct period. The process which follows has four steps involved in it.
The first step is to select the source from which the words are to come. The original stipulation for documents to qualify was that they had to come from the period of Elizabeth I's reign, however I have refined things a little more an am only using sources from the 1590's for a little more focus. In this document selection I aim to get as close to the original document as possible. A pdf format facsimile of the original is the best in this particular instance even if the readability is a little lacking in places.
The second step is to extract the words from the document. A special note needs to be made here that I am only extracting those words which are spelled differently from their modern counter-parts, have a different meaning from their modern counter-parts, or are what would be called "difficult" words, those which for the modern audience would cause issue. These words are first recorded in a hard-copy form, written to paper. First in a book and then on loose-leaf paper. The former for collection, the second to start collation. Once the two hard-copies are made they are then recorded in alphabetical order electronically under the title of the document. This is the longest part of the process.
The third step in the is to integrate these words into the lexicon, remembering to highlight those "difficult" words which have been found in the search. These words are stored alphabetically by the modern word. Once this process has been completed then I look for the definitions of the "difficult" words and those with different meanings additional or separate from their modern ones. These meanings are stored to be added into the lexicon later on.
This is a process which takes quite some time, hence this project continuing as long as it has. It is also for this reason that my updates which have been printed recently have such large gaps between them. Regardless, I hope that due to the time taken with this process that a reasonably accurate recording of the words from the period is made.
Cheers,
Henry.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)