TEIガイドラインP5

12.1.1 校合項目TEI: 校合項目¶

Individual textual variations are encoded using the appelement, which groups together all the readings constituting thevariation. The identification of discrete textual variations orapparatus entries is not a purely mechanical process; different editorsmay group readings differently. No rules are given here as to how togroup readings into apparatus entries; the tags given here may be usedto group readings in whatever way the editor finds most perspicuous oruseful.

The attributes loc, from, and to,are used to link the apparatus entry to the base text, if present. Insuch cases, several methodsmay be used for such linkage, each involving a slightly different usagefor these attributes. Linkage between text and apparatus is describedbelow in section 12.2 校本とテキストの関連付け. For the use of theapp element without a base text, see 12.2.3 併記法.

12.1.2 解釈TEI: 解釈¶

In recording readings within an apparatus entry, the rdgelement may always be used; each app must contain at least onerdg.

The lem element may also be used, under some circumstances,to record the base text of the source edition, to mark the readings of abase witness, to indicate the preference of an editor or encoder for aparticular reading, or to make clear, in cases of ambiguity, preciselywhich portion of the main text the variation applies to. Those whoprefer to work without the notion of a base text may prefer not to useit at all. How it is used depends in part on the method chosen forlinking the apparatus to the text; for more information, see section12.2 校本とテキストの関連付け.

解釈 may be encoded individually, or grouped for perspicuityusing the rdgGrp element described in section 12.1.3 校合項目の多様化.

The wit attribute identifies the witnesses which have thereading in question. It is required if the apparatus gathers togetherreadings from different witnesses, but may be omitted in an apparatusrecording the readings of only one witness, e.g. substitutions,divergent opinions on what is in the witness or on how to expandabbreviations, etc. Even in such a one-witness apparatus, however,the wit attribute may still be useful when it is desired torecord the occurrence of a particular reading in some other witness.For other methods of identifying the witnesses to a reading, seesection 12.1.4 実現形.

The hand and resp attributes are intelligibleonly on an element recording a reading from a single witness, and shouldnot be used if more than one witness is given on the same rdgor lem element. If more than one witness is given for thereading, they are undefined. To convey this information when thewitness is one among several, the witDetail element should beused; see section 12.1.4 実現形.

Where there is a greater weight of editorial discussion andinterpretation than can conveniently be expressed through the attributesprovided on these tags (e.g. multiple causes for a single reading;multiple editorial responsibility for an emendation) this informationcan be attached to the apparatus in a note, or recorded in the featurestructure notation defined in chapter 18 素性構造. In particular,such recurring text-critical situations as palaeographic confusion ofparticular letters, or homœoarchy or homœoteleuton involving specificcharacter groups, may lend themselves to feature structure treatment.Information concerning these recurrent situations may be encoded intodatabase-like fragments within the text which would then be available tosophisticated computer-assisted analysis. Further work remains to bedone on such mechanisms, however, and so no examples are given here ofthe use of feature structures in text-critical apparatus.

Encoders should be aware of the distinct fields of use of theattribute values wit, hand, and resp.Broadly, wit identifies the physical entity in which thereading is found (manuscript, clay tablet, papyrus, printed edition);hand refers to the agent responsible for inscribing thatreading in that physical entity (scribe, author, inscriber, hand 1, hand2); resp indicates the scholar responsible for asserting theexistence of that reading in that physical entity. In some cases, thecategories may blur: a scholar may produce an edition introducingreadings for which he or she is responsible; that edition may itselfbecome a witness in a later critical apparatus. Thus, readingsintroduced as corrections in the earlier edition will be seen in thelater apparatus as witnessed by the earlier edition. As observed in thediscussion concerning the discrimination of hand andresp in transcription of primary sources in section 11.4.2 Hand, Responsibility, and Certainty Attributes, the division of layers of responsibility through variousscholars for particular aspects of a particular reading may require themore complex mechanisms for assigning responsibility described inchapter 21 確信度・責任.

12.1.3 校合項目の多様化TEI: 校合項目の多様化¶

The rdgGrp element is a member of class att.textCritical and therefore can carry thewit, type, cause, varSeq,hand, and resp attributes described in thepreceding section. When values for any of these attributes are givenon a rdgGrp element, the values given are inherited by therdg or lem elements nested within the reading group,unless overridden by a new specification on the individual readingelement.

Similarly, rdgGrp may be used to organize the substantivevariants of an apparatus entry. Editors may need to indicate that eachof a group of witnesses may be taken as all supporting a particularreading, even though there may be variation concerning the exact form ofthat reading in, or the degree of support offered by, those witnesses.For example: one may identify three substantive variants on the firstword of Chaucer's Wife of Bath's Prologue in themanuscripts: these might be expressed in regularized spelling asExperience, Experiment, and Eriment. In fact, themanuscripts display many different spellings of these words, and ascholar may wish both to show that the manuscripts have all thesevariant spellings and that these variant spellings actually support onlythe three regularized spelling forms. One may term these variantspellings as ‘subvariants’ of the regularizedspelling forms.

This subvariation can be expressed within an app elementby gathering the readings into three groups according to thenormalized form of their reading. All the readings within each groupmay be accounted subvariants of the main reading for the group, whichmay be indicated by tagging it as a lem element or asrdg type='group base'.

12.1.4 実現形TEI: 実現形¶

A given reading is associated with the set of witnesses attesting itby listing the witnesses in the wit attribute on therdg, lem, or rdgGrp element. Specialmechanisms, described in the following sections, are needed to associateannotation on a reading with one specific witness among several(section 12.1.4.1 実現形の詳細な情報), to transcribe witness information verbatim from asource edition (section 12.1.4.2 実現形 in the Source), and to identify theformal lists of witnesses typically provided in the front matter ofcritical editions (section 12.1.4.3 実現形リスト).

12.1.5 断片的な文献TEI: 断片的な文献¶

12.2.1 所在の参照方法TEI: 所在の参照方法¶

The location-referenced method of encoding apparatus provides aconvenient method for encoding printed apparatus; in this method as inmost printed editions, the apparatus is linked to the base text byindicating explicitly only the block of text on which there is a variant(noted usually by a canonical reference scheme, or by line number in theedition, such as A 137 or Page 15 line 1).

Where it is intended that the apparatus be complete enough to allowthe reconstruction of the witnesses (or at least oftheir non-orthographic variations), the location-reference method shouldbe avoided in favor of one of the other two methods, which allow theunambiguous reconstruction of the lemma from the encoding.

12.2.2 2点参照法TEI: 2点参照法¶

In the double end-point attachment method, the beginning and end ofthe lemma in the base text are both explicitly indicated. It thusdiffers from the location-referenced method, in which only the largerspan of text containing the lemma is indicated. Double end-pointattachment permits unambiguous matching of each variant reading againstits lemma. It or the parallel-segmentation method should be used in allcases where this is desired, for example where the apparatus is intendedto enable full reconstruction of the text, or of the substantives, ofevery witness.

When the double endpoint attachment method is used, thefrom and to attributes of the app elementare used to indicate the beginning and ending points of the reading inthe base text: their values are identifiers which occur at thelocations in question. If no other markup is present there, thebeginning and ending points should be marked using the anchorelement defined in chapter 16 Linking, Segmentation, and Alignment. In cases where it is notpossible to insert anchors within the base text (e.g. where the text ison a read-only medium) the beginning and end of the lemma may beindicated by using the ‘indirect pointing’ mechanismsdiscussed in chapter 16 Linking, Segmentation, and Alignment. Explicit anchors are more likelyto be reliable, and are therefore to be preferred.

The lemma need not be repeated within the app element inthis method, as it may be extracted reliably from the base text. If anexhaustive list of witnesses is available, it will also not be necessaryto specify just which manuscripts agree with the base-text to enablereconstruction of witnesses. An application will be able to determinethe manuscripts that witness the base reading, by noting which witnessesare attested as having a variant reading, and inferring the base-textreading for all others after adjusting for fragmentary witnesses and forwitnesses carrying overlapping variant readings.

Because creation and interpretation of double end-point attachmentapparatus will be lengthy and difficult it is likely that they willusually be created and examined by scholars only with mechanicalassistance.

12.2.3 併記法TEI: 併記法¶

This method differs from the double end-point attachment method inthat all variants at any point of the text are expressed as variantson one another. In this method, no two variations can overlap,although they may nest. Thus, the concepts of a base text and of alemma become unnecessary: the texts compared are divided intomatching segments all synchronized with one another. This permitsdirect comparison of any span of text in any witness with that inany other witness. It is also very easy with this method for anapplication to extract the full text of any one witness from theapparatus.

This method will (by definition) always be satisfactory when thereare just two texts for comparison (assuming they are in the samelanguage and script). It will also be useful where editors do not wishto privilege a text as the ‘base’ or when editorswish to present parallel texts. It will become less convenient astraditions become more complex and tension develops between the need tosegment on the largest variation found and the need to express thefinest detail of agreement between witnesses.

This method cannot be used with external apparatus: it must be usedin-line. Note that apparatus encoded with this method may be translatedinto the double end-point attachment method and back without loss ofinformation. Where double-end-point-attachment encodings have nooverlapping lemmata, translation of these to the parallel segmentationencoding and back will also be possible without loss of information.

Alternatively, the witnesses for every reading may be stated, as inthe first example.

Parallel segmentation cannot, however, deal very gracefully withvariants which overlap without nesting: such variants must be broken upinto pieces in order to keep all witnesses synchronized.