Skip navigation.
Home
Homepage / Page personnelle

TEI: critical apparatus cheatsheet

Sometimes I have wished I had a "cheatsheet" to find back a quick reference to the way something should / could be encoded ;) I have finally compiled this short memento in the hope that it will save others some precious time. Feel free to comment!

This "cheatsheet" is not aimed at replacing the TEI Guidelines. It is just a memento proposing quick solutions to common issues for TEI users already familiar with the TEI Guidelines on Critical Apparatus (http://www.tei-c.org/release/doc/tei-p5-doc/en/html/TC.html ) and the Representation of Primary Sources (http://www.tei-c.org/release/doc/tei-p5-doc/en/html/PH.html ), most notably, in addition to which notions of Manuscript Description (http://www.tei-c.org/release/doc/tei-p5-doc/en/html/MS.html ) will probably come in handy.

Its focus is on the translation of the traditional ways editors express the apparatus into TEI. It is made with, in mind, people who are more familiar with printed critical editions but want to learn how to use the TEI.

Nota:

- in all these examples, the parallel-segmentation is used. It is a personal choice: I deem the two other methods either too print-oriented (the location-referenced method), or too difficult to use to encode a document "by hand", without the help of a piece of software handling the references (the double-end-point-attached method). For more details on the three methods, see: http://www.tei-c.org/release/doc/tei-p5-doc/en/html/TC.html#TCAPLK

- although the parallel-segmentation does not imply the use of a base text, I have used the <lem> element in all the examples; this is just a personal choice, and using only <rdg> elements would not change the examples.

Table of contents:


Omissions

Example in a printed apparatus:

fides omit  V 

Suggestion in TEI:

<app>

<lem>fides</lem>

<rdg wit="#V" cause="omissio"/>

</app>

Comment:

In the case of an omission, one (or more) of the witness(es) have nothing where the base text has something, so it makes sense to leave the <rdg> element empty.

Optionally, to facilitate the processing of your encoded file, you may use the @clause (or the @type) attribute to classify the type of reading. The value "omissio", suggested here, is only a suggestion: you are free to use another term. For more details, see: http://www.tei-c.org/release/doc/tei-p5-doc/en/html/ref-att.textCritical.html

 

Additions

Example in a printed apparatus:

fides add.  V 

Suggestion in TEI:

<app>
    <lem/>
    <rdg wit="#V">           
                <add>fides</add>
    </rdg>
</app>

Comment:

Like in an omission, but the other way round: it's the base text which has nothing where a particular witness adds something, so we can leave the <lem> element empty.

 

Word corrected after a previous error / misspelling

Example in a printed apparatus:

fides corr. ex fidem V

Suggestion in TEI:

<app>
    <lem>fides</lem>
    <rdg wit="#V">
            <subst>
                <del rend="strikethrough">fidem</del>
                <add>fides</add>
            </subst>
    </rdg>
</app>

Comment:

The @rend of the <del> element is used to indicate which type of deletion has been used (it could be "strikethrough", "expunctuated", "scratched" or whatever. You could consider it optional, if all the deleted elements in your text are deleted by means of "strikethrough" (as opposed to expunctuation, for instance, or the parchment being scratched).
If need be, you can add a @hand attribute to <del> and/or <add>, to differentiate substitutions made by the first copist from those made by later hands. For more details, see: http://www.tei-c.org/release/doc/tei-p5-doc/en/html/ref-subst.html

 

Corrections or additions in special places (margin, interlinear...)

Examples in a printed apparatus:

1) fides corr. interl. ex fidem V

2) fides corr. in marg. ex fidem V

3) fides add in marg. V

Suggestion in TEI:

example 1:

<app>
    <lem>fides</lem>
    <rdg wit="#V">
            <subst>
                <del rend="strikethrough">fidem</del>
                <add place="above">fides</add>
            </subst>
    </rdg>
</app>

example 2:

<app>
    <lem>fides</lem>
    <rdg wit="#V">
            <subst>
                <del rend="strikethrough">fidem</del>
                <add place="margin">fides</add>
            </subst>
    </rdg>
</app>  

example 3:

<app>
    <lem/>
    <rdg wit="#V">           
                <add place="margin">fides</add>
    </rdg>
</app>


Comment:

You can check the various possible values for @place here: http://www.tei-c.org/release/doc/tei-p5-doc/en/html/ref-att.placement.html

If the addition / correction takes place inline, you can either use no @place attribute (if you consider that by default everything is inline unless otherwise stated), or use @place="inline".
 

Sic

 

Examples in a printed apparatus:

1) fider sic V
2) fider sic pro fides V

Suggestion in TEI:

Example 1:

<app>
    <lem>fides</lem>
    <rdg wit="#V">           
                <sic>fider</sic>
    </rdg>
</app>

Example 2:

<app>
    <lem>fides</lem>
    <rdg wit="#V">  

<choice>

<sic>fider</sic>

<corr>fides</corr>

</choice>

    </rdg>
</app>

Comment

It could be argued that the use of the <choice> element with the <sic> and <corr> children is not necessary: since these example use a <lem> element, one might think that the content of this element is what will be the content of the <corr> element.

But the reading in V might be something totally different from the reading in the <lem> element, but still misspelled and calling for a sic mention (for instance, if V had "comunio", misspelled with a single m, where the other manuscripts have "fides"). In this case, the full <choice> with both <sic> and <corr> would be necessary to display correctly the apparatus as wanted in example 2.

For more details, see: http://www.tei-c.org/release/doc/tei-p5-doc/en/html/ref-sic.html

 

Interventions by another hand, which is not precisely identified (thanks to Syd Bauman and Matija Ogrin for this solution)

Examples in a printed apparatus:

fides corr. ex fidem al. man. V

Suggestion in TEI:

  • in the teiHeader: in the profileDesc, define a main hand (here, "mh"), and an "other hand" (here "oh"), making it clear that the latter might encompass several different hands:

       <handNotes>
         <handNote xml:id="mh" scope="major">
           Unidentified hand that wrote most of manuscript.
         </handNote>
         <handNote xml:id="oh" scope="minor">
           Unidentified other hand or hands, possibly from different scribes, that wrote additional notes.
         </handNote>
       </handNotes>

  • in the main body of the edition: reference this "other hand"

<app>
    <lem>fides</lem>
    <rdg wit="#V">
            <subst hand="#oh">
                <del rend="strikethrough">fidem</del>
                <add>fides</add>
            </subst>
    </rdg>
</app>

Comment:

The only difficulty here is that the "other hand" responsible for the correction is not clearly identified. The TEI provides a mechanism to identify the various hands in a manuscript, but here, the editor only indicates a vague "other hand"; the editor gives no indication about this hand being a 1st, 2nd, or third, it is just characterized, loosely, as being different from the hand (or hands?) of the main text. This means that this "other hand" could be, at other places in the text, quite another hand from the first "other hand" mentioned.

Still, the recommended practice seems to be to use the same mechanism as if you had clear identifications for all hands: you just create, in the header, a <handnote> element defining the "main hand" of your manuscript, and another defining an "other hand", carefully mentioning that this "other hand" might encompass several different scribes. Then, in the main body of your edition, you can reference this "other hand" in the @hand attribute.

For more details, see: http://www.tei-c.org/release/doc/tei-p5-doc/en/html/ref-handNotes.html

 

Suppleamus

Example in a printed apparatus:

fides suppl.

Suggestion in TEI:

<supplied>fides</supplied>

Comment:

The <supplied> element is not part of the Critical Apparatus chapter of the Guidelines. Here, it does not appear within a <rdg> element, but in the main text.

If you aim is to render a print-like apparatus from your TEI encoded file, you will have to remember to make a template in your XSL that processes together the <app> and <supplied> elements, numbering them sequentially.

For more details, see: http://www.tei-c.org/release/doc/tei-p5-doc/en/html/ref-supplied.html

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

still not allowed

It seems that the problem discussed here is still not resolved!
I'm currently working on a project involving multiple witnesses to a poem. In some cases there are up to 5 added or deletet from witness to witness so my first intuition was to embed the in their entirity in the elemente (also thought of using and but it's still not allowed.
is there a workaround or alternative way to achieve this?

Hello, Marjorie, You made up

Hello, Marjorie,

You made up a fine collection of examples which hold true, in my opinion, and cover a set of frequent situations one comes across while encoding an apparatus. As to your example for hands (mh / oh), I would only consider that in

<subst>
<del rend="strikethrough">fidem</del>
<add hand="#oh">fides</add>
</subst>

not only the <add> was made by the hand 'oh', but the deletion "strikethrough" as well. For this reason, we could put the @hand on entire <subst> element:

<subst hand="#oh">
<del rend="strikethrough">fidem</del>
<add>fides</add>
</subst>

But this is a minor problem, finally. A more serious problem with the current state of TEI app is what to do when, say, we have several witnesses of a poem, and in our base text, we have 8 stanzas, in another version only 6 stanzas and in some other 7? We are not allowed to have an <lg> and not even an <l> element within the <app> entry. So, we must put it the other way round, which may be somewhat awkward, like this:

<l>
<app>
<rdg wit="#A"> [the text of the verse line here] </rdg>
<rdg wit="#B"/>
<rdg wit="#C"/>
</app>
</l>

We should then repeat this for every <l> , while it would be more practical to "say" this only once for entire stanza (with an <lg> within a <rdg> ).

Regards,
Matija

Thanks Matija!

As regards the example involving hands in a substitution, you are right, it would probably make more sense to attach the @hand to the <subst> element rather than the . I'll update the example according to your comment.

I do agree with you about <app>, it shouldn't be a phrase-level only element. It's also an impediment for prose text, for instance when a witness omits a couple of paragraphs. Hopefully the Critical Apparatus will evolve to take this into account.

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

Post new comment

The content of this field is kept private and will not be shown publicly.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
Image CAPTCHA
Enter the characters shown in the image.