What is transcription?

Part 2

C. M. Sperberg-McQueen

Claus Huitfeldt

Yves Marcoux

Digital Humanities 2009, 24 June 2009

http://www.blackmesatech.com/2009/06/dh2009

Introduction

background / origin of the work
meaning and interpretation of markup languages
modeling as elucidation
description not prescription
previous project report 2007

Overview

introduction
the document level
the readings level
concluding remarks

Transcriptions and assertions

read a transcription, learn about the exemplar*
propositional content
assertions / inferences
disagreement as logical contradiction
relativization of disagreements → second level (readings)

Assertions model 1

Transcriptions convey propositional content.

Assertions model 2

Document level:
- Documents have tokens of particular types.
- Tokens are basic or compound.
- Types are basic or compound.
- Disagreement among transcriptions is contradiction in their assertions.
- Assertions may underspecify the document (indeterminacy, equivocation).

Assertions model 3

Readings level:
- Readings a t t r i b u t e tokens of particular types to documents.
- A reading of a transcription generates a reading of the exemplar.

The document level

a level of description
a language for talking about documents
a set of kinds of statements one can make about documents
the things a reading can say about documents

How documents say things

documents as physical objects
distinguishable marks
tokens
tokens of particular types
compound tokens of particular (compound) types

Tokens and types

basic tokens ⇒ basic types
token sequences ⇒ text flows
regions ⇒ structural units

Formalizations (in Alloy)

Types have identity, but we specify no other properties for them.

abstract sig Type {}

Tokens map to types.

abstract sig Token {
 type : Type
}

Basic tokens (characters, lexical items) map to basic types.

sig Basic_Type extends Type {}
sig Basic_Token extends Token {}{
  type in Basic_Type 
}

Regions

Regions are a kind of token; they may have a set or sequence of subregions.

abstract sig Region extends Token {
  subregions : set Region
}{ 
  type in S_Unit
  type.children = subregions.@type
}

sig Ordered_Region extends Region {
 sub_seq : seq Region
}{
  elems[sub_seq] = subregions
  type in Ordered_S_Unit
  type.ch_seq = sub_seq.@type
}

sig Unordered_Region extends Region {}{
  type in Unordered_S_Unit
}

Structural units

Regions are realizations / instantiations of structural units, which are similarly ordered or unordered.

abstract sig S_Unit extends Type {
  kind : lone Kind,
  props : set AVPair,
  children : set S_Unit
}

sig Ordered_S_Unit extends S_Unit {
  ch_seq : seq S_Unit
}{
  elems[ch_seq] = children
}

sig Unordered_S_Unit extends S_Unit {}

Token and type sequences

The lowest level of region is a sequence of basic tokens; the lowest level of structural unit is a sequence of basic types (a text flow).

sig Text_Flow extends S_Unit {
  types : seq Basic_Type
}{
  kind = PCData
  no children 
}
sig Token_Sequence extends Region {
  tokens : seq Basic_Token
}{
  type in Text_Flow
  type.types = tokens.@type
  no subregions
}

Example: Büchner's Woyzeck

Büchner's Woyzeck

Sentential form

(∃ d : Document)
(∃ r1, r2, ... : Region)
(∃ ts01, ts02, ... : Token_Sequence)
(∃ k00, k01, k02, k03, k04, k05, k06 : Basic_Token)
(∃ s1, s2, ... : Structural_Unit)
(∃ f1, f2, ... : Text_Flow)
(∃ t_a, t_A, t_b, t_B, t_c, ..., t_e, ... t_k, ... t_o, ... t_W, ... t_y, t_z, ... : Basic_Type)
token_type(k00,t_W)
     ∧ token_type(k01,t_o)
     ∧ token_type(k02,t_y)
     ∧ token_type(k03,t_z)
     ∧ token_type(k04,t_e)
     ∧ token_type(k05,t_c)
     ∧ token_type(k06,t_k)
     ∧ ts_tokens(ts01, 〈 k00, k01, k02, k03, k04, k05, k06 〉 )
     ∧ token_type(ts01, f1)
     // N.B. implies tf_types(f1, "Woyzeck")
     // “There are seven tokens in d which fit together in a sequence, and which spell out the text flow ‘Woyzeck’.”

     ∧ ordreg_subregions(r1, 〈 ts01 〉 )
     ∧ osu_children(s1, 〈 f1 〉)
     ∧ token_type(r1, s1)
     ∧ su_kind(s1, speaker_attribution)
     // “The text flow ‘Wozzeck’ is a speaker attribution” ...

When the world was young and simple

In the Garden of Eden,

Tokens are easily distinguished from other marks.
Each token (at any level) maps to exactly one type.
Each token sequences has exactly one sequence over its tokens.
Each ordered region has exactly one sequence over its subregions.

That is, every document is determinate and univocal.

After the Fall

Some documents are indeterminate. (Cf. Roude, Cayless, Stokes papers.)

The Marburg edition writes Woyzeck.

Franzos transcribed it Wozzeck.

Equivocation

What can happen by chance can also be willed.

An ‘inversion’ by Scott Kim.

And hypertext? Don't get us started.

Modeling indeterminacy and equivocation

non-functional token → type mapping
disjunctive and conjunctive types
intertranslatability of
- functional mapping to disjunctive types
- non-functional mapping to ‘normal’ types
- conjunctive types

The readings level

So much for the document level.

Now for the readings level.

Relativizing contradictions

Contradictions → paralysis.

An evasion: from

Region r4 reads ‘Wozzeck’ and region r4 reads ‘Woyzeck’.

make

F says that region r4 reads ‘Wozzeck’ and M says that region r4 reads ‘Woyzeck’.

(Escape to the meta-level.)

Formalizing readings

At the document level, we had

sig Document {
 r : Region,
 s : S_Unit
}

Formalizing readings

At the readings level, we have

sig Document {
 r : Region,
 s : S_Unit
}
sig Reading {
 d : Document,
 r : Region,
 s : S_Unit
}

With the meaning ‘At the document level, reading R claims that document d has top-level region (token) r mapping to top-level structural unit (type) s’.

Reading E in absentia

How do we get from

a reading of a transcription

a reading of the exemplar

Two ways for transcriptions to convey readings of exemplars:

re-instantiation (copying): T instantiates exactly the same types as E.
level-splitting: T is not a copy of E but a recipe for making a reading of E.*

Concluding remarks

Topics for further work

can transcription-irrelevant information be filtered out of the assertion set?
conjunctive and disjunctive types
systems of basic types
- choice of type system
- refinement / subsumption relations among types
- character / glyph (graph / allograph) distinction
refinement / subsumption relations among transcriptions
deletion, insertion, editorial instructions
other inscription properties
typographic corrections
abbreviations
engage more fully with related work (Pierazzo, Jannidis, Caton, Roude, Cayless, Stokes, Tanselle, ...
illustrate application to born-digital artefacts
semasiography
information graphics

Merci

Today is Québec National Day.

Bonne fête, Québec!