If Text Then Code

  • About the Course
    • Course Goals
    • Course Modules
  • Important Information
    • Contact Me
    • Policies
  • Schedule
  • Assignments
    • Reflection Posts
      • Prompt #1
      • Prompt #2
      • Prompt #3
    • “Found Text” Abstracts
    • Build Your Own Website
    • Write Your Own Text Adventure Game
    • Publish Your Own Digital Edition
    • Final Project
    • Rubrics
  • Resources
    • Readings
    • Tool Kit
    • Tutorials & Exercises
  • Reflections

The Linn Letter Process

November 18, 2016 by Dale Hartman

All of the transcription we have done in this unit has been very much a collaborative effort.  From the very first transcription activity we did, there wouldn’t have been much progress made had we been working alone and isolated.  More sets of eyes looking at a single line is one of the best ways to speed up the transcription process.  A lot of words can be recognized with just a simple look-over, but some words are more challenging to interpret.  The best method I’ve found for these words is to go through one character at a time and try to compare and transcribe each letter.  Generally, these problematic words arise when the start or the end of a word are hard to read, so getting the other part and making an educated guess is also a valid strategy.

The document transcribed from and the end result text marked up in TEI
The document transcribed from and the end result text marked up in TEI

There were a number of advantages to working with the actual documents in the Bucknell Archives.  The simple black and white scans we were using as the source of our transcriptions lost a lot of details that were in the original letters.  For instance, one word that was giving me trouble in the scanned document was something that looked like it should have been ‘had,’ but had way too many lines to be those three letters.  When I finally got to look at that part of the document in the archive, it became apparent that the word was indeed ‘had,’ but Linn had originally written ‘were’ there first, and changed the word to ‘had’ by writing over it.  This intricacy was lost in the monochrome black scan we were originally working with.  However, the processing that went into creating the digital scan did help to pull better information than the human eye could.  It’s easy to see bleed-through on the physical document, which made some words harder to read.  However, in the scan, this bleed-through was filtered out.

Here is the word in question, hard to decipher in the scan but easily understood when looking at the actual document.
Here is the word in question, hard to decipher in the scan but easily understood when looking at the actual document.

A lot of what Linn writes about in the March 2nd letter and journal entry are the same, the visit from Morris, learning of the occupation of Nashville, Memphis, and Savannah, etc.  He even describes these events in nearly the exact same words in both the letter and the journal.  However, in his journal, he noted that the instructions from Morris were against army orders.  This is not something he notified his brother of.  He also spent more time in his journal complaining about the little irritations of everyday life (poor weather, broken kitchen equipment).  In his letter home, he spent more time discussing the state of the war and world overall, talking about US relations with the Rebels, England, and Mexico.

Filed Under: Reflection #3, Reflections Tagged With: Archives, HTML, JML, Letters, transcription, XML

Comments

  1. Yash Mittal says

    November 19, 2016 at 3:03 am

    Thoughts well put, Dale. I also transcribed the letter one character at a time, and I fortunately stumbled upon a website to quickly search for words using wildcards, which expedited the transcription process. In addition, I found it interesting that Linn used similar words in both his letter(s) and journal entries. There were only a few occasions when I could tell the different in his writings, especially when he mentioned the weather.

HUMN 271

Bertrand 012
TR 9:30-11:20am
Dr. Diane Jakacki

Authors

  • Dale Hartman RSS feed
  • Diane Jakacki RSS feed
  • ejp013 RSS feed
  • Ella Ekstrom RSS feed
  • jaa023 RSS feed
  • Jingya Wu RSS feed
  • Julia Wigginton RSS feed
  • Matthew Fay RSS feed
  • Matthew Lucas RSS feed
  • Neil Lin RSS feed
  • Peter Onusconich RSS feed
  • Sarah Rosecky RSS feed
  • Tong Tong RSS feed
  • Xing Fu RSS feed
  • Yash Mittal RSS feed

Creative Commons License

Creative Commons License Bucknell University Humanities 271 Course by Diane Jakacki is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.

Copyright © 2023 · eleven40 Pro Theme on Genesis Framework · WordPress · Log in