My first transcribing/encoding experience

Bentham JB/002/312/001Screen Shot 2013-03-06 at 4.48.28 PM

When I first glanced at the exercise for today, I wasn’t sure exactly what transcribing would entail. The tutorial videos were very informative, and the first video made the process seem relatively easy. But when I watched the second video, I thought, “I have to ENCODE this, too?” Typing words is easy. Encoding, to me, has always seemed like writing in an entirely new language.

However, I am very into toolbars. (I mean that). As such, I thought the encoding process of transcribing Bentham was totally doable, even on my first try! I typed the line breaks since they were so numerous, and made one typo ( <lb> instead of <lb/> ) at one point, but I caught myself when I viewed the preview. Other than that, the toolbar was incredibly easy to navigate, especially because I had a very simple page sequence with very few “additions,” no “strikethroughs,” and NO unusual spellings, illegible words or questionable words on my end!

Seriously, I have seen some of the words my classmates are dealing with and I’m not sure how I ended up with JB/002/312/001, which appears to have the most pristine cursive handwriting I’ve ever seen. I went to the “un-transcribed” links and this was the first folio I tried! But enough gloating about my beginner’s luck. I enjoyed the encoding experience, not because it forced me to try something I thought would leave me befuddled (and it didn’t) but because it forced (literal) close reading. Zoomed in, read-each-word close reading. With such diligent attention to words (and punctuation! oh, the punctuation) one can’t help but consider the choices the writer made as he or she composed the text. I’d imagine that transcribing and encoding poetry is especially illuminating in this way, as each line break and em-dash is noted in code. None of these are particularly new or astute observations, but it was, of course, fruitful to experience them first hand.

Happy snowquester, everyone!

Transcribing Bentham Experience

Like a number of other people in the class, I thought this exercise was going to be easier than it turned out to be. I have a lot of experience transcribing Medieval Latin manuscripts, and even some experience transcribing 18th century manuscripts in English for the Works of Jonathan Edwards project at Yale. I found it easy both to register for the Transcribe Bentham site and to use their transcription tool. I did not, however, find it easy to select a page for transcription. (Thanks to Melissa and Dan, who pointed out the banner with a link to un-transcribed material at the top of the Transcription Desk page.) And, of course, once I found links to the un-transcribed folios, it took a half-dozen tries to find one where I could actually read the handwriting.

I ended up transcribing JB/107/293/002, which was relatively easy, because it is a fair copy written out by one of Bentham’s copyists.

My main interest in this exercise was not to challenge my ability to read 18th and 19th century English manuscripts, but to evaluate the transcribing environment. In this regard, I think the Transcribing Bentham encoding tool compares quite well with similar systems (such as the excellent T-PEN for Medievalists.)

My only reservation about this approach to a “Big Humanities” project is that it privileges easier projects thatover more difficult projects that might have greater intrinsic scholarly value. I consider the Transcribe Bentham project (relatively) easier because a) the source manuscripts are written in the dominant language of the DH world, English, and b) the primary barrier to transcription is Bentham’s bad handwriting (i.e., transcribers do not need specialized paleographical training, which they almost certainly would for manuscripts much older than these). I understand that just because there’s certain things you can’t do (or at least can’t do easily) is not a reason not to do the things you can do. But every project has an opportunity cost, and I think we should always keep in mind which project we’d choose if all of the alternatives were equally doable.

On fragmentation and handwriting!

As my classmates, I found it very hard to read the manuscript. I also had the feeling it was not going to be that hard: as a teacher I am very used to the most bizarre handwritings, but this was a puzzle for me. Second, as not being native English, it was more difficult to guess! Sometimes I did not know if the phrase or word I was reading belonged to the time Bentham wrote or it was more modern. The same with old words that I never heard of before. I searched on dictionaries, texts by Benham, I opened other folios. I do not know if I am the right person to work with an archive in a language other than the ones I know well! But sometimes it could be productive, as a foreign view is always interesting and helpful.

There were moments that I did not understand what I was transcribing as a text: I had just words with a minimum of cohesion and coherence. I had a feeling of complete fragmentation! I think that the exercise was good to see how fragmented digital texts are, how we face fragmentation everywhere working in DH. We were working with just a tiny part of the gigantic Bentham’s work, and in my case, knowing just what Foucault said about panopticons and nothing else. The good is that now I know a lot more about Bentham, his life and his work.

I must admit that I liked it a lot transcribing and encoding. When I began transcribing I found the tool bar very easy to use! But it was not so easy for me to find a folio to transcribe, I selected this one using the random option and it turned out to be easy level. But I had problems to read three little words, even though I spent many days trying to figure them out.
I received an answer, and it was accepted! I was surprised to know that the transcript was right! I just missed a few words (mainly because of the crossing outs), but the rest was ok. I received a text saying that it was “far from the easiest manuscript to transcribe, so this is a great effort!”

I found it very interesting having been part of a project that thinks of the importance of preservation (and I agree with Mary’s words), and in which many people are involved (volunteer transcribers, historians, editors, digital humanists, etc.) I liked the idea I was helping to the project, creating something new, doing, building.

 

Transcribing and Encoding Bentham

Quote

Having experimented briefly with XML encoding during the Technoromanticism class with Dr. Neil Fraistat, I was somewhat prepared for what this exercise entailed. However, I was pleasantly surprised to learn that the good people behind the Transcribe Bentham project have made XML encoding easier than ever for the average user. The toolbar was incredibly easy to use, and so I had no problem figuring out how to mark-up my manuscript (JB/051/376/003). The hard part was the transcription process. Like others who have posted before me, there were several words that I just could not figure out. Initially I was overwhelmed, feeling like I was placing <unclear> tags all over the place. I spent many long minutes staring at my screen begging the words to reveal their secrets. I even tried looking at each individual letter, coming up with strange words like “unassepnable,” which were clearly not correct. After stepping away for a bit and coming back to the manuscript, I was able to further decipher some of the words. Yet, I was still unsure in a few places. Finally, I decided to enlist the help of Charity to see if she could figure out any of my “questionable readings,” and was happy to find that she was able to clear up a few of the words that had been eluding me. Eventually, I still ended up settling a few times on educated guesses surrounded by the <unclear> tags, but overall I felt pretty good that the majority of my transcription was correct.

This morning, when I checked my email, I was pleased to see that my text had been approved. While the editor made some changes and filled in some of my mystery words (“unassignable,” not “unassepnable” or even my actual word guess, “inestimable”), the majority of my encoded transcription was approved as being correct. There were also some stylistic changes. Words that had been separated in the text by line breaks were completed in the top line, leaving no indication that the word was split up in the actual manuscript. I am guessing that this is just to make it easier to read? Also, the notes, which I felt started at the end of the first line, were moved to the top of the entire paragraph. This, as I’ve stated, was a stylistic choice as far as I can tell, and most likely serves to make the content a bit easier to read, especially since the notes describe what is being talked about in the paragraphs. Anyway, I was happy to note that the majority of my attempt at encoding and transcribing Bentham was a success! Although there were some moments of discouragement in which I thought I would never be able to figure out some of Bentham’s hand-writing, it was definitely fun when I was finally able to figure out a muddled word. The best part of this assignment was definitely encoding though. As I stated on my questionnaire, I was very happy to see that the encoding process was made so simple through the toolbar so that beginners like me had no problem encoding Bentham’s manuscript. It is definitely an activity I would be interested in doing again, though perhaps with a different subject matter for transcription.

Transcribble

When I first read this assignment, I thought it was going to be a piece of cake for me.  As a TV production assistant–and beyond–I was required to transcribe taped interviews on an almost daily basis.  But trying to decipher Jeremy Bentham’s handwriting is not even remotely close to rewinding a tape to pick up words during Courtney Love’s drunk ramblings.  Bentham’s handwriting has Love’s slurred speech beat, hands down.

After many of the same issues Mary discussed in her post–namely Firefox not being Transcribe Bentham-friendly–I finally was able to view the manuscripts available for  transcription.  After perusing a few that had not been transcribed and seeing the writing was nearly illegible, I opted for an “easy” manuscript.  Of course most of these had already been done, so it was back to the untranscribed category and clicking at random to find one that might possibly fall into the “easy” category if I was lucky.  I chose JB/002/010/001 because it looked user-friendly.  I was wrong.

It seems every other word got a <gap> label, resulting in numerous ellipses in the finished transcript.  Phrases such as the following left me puzzled and the document …

Screen shot 2013-03-06 at 12.31.16 AM

Overall, I think Transcribe Bentham is a great project.  Although I’m still not sure if its intent is to get people like us who think this stuff is super cool to do free work for them.  Perhaps it’s just mutually beneficial.

Crowdsourcing Transcriptions

I was rather amused at the crowdsourced transcription assignment for class, since there was a Crowdsourcing session at THATCamp Lehigh Valley (which I attended this weekend).  If you like this sort of thing, but can’t stand Bentham’s handwriting, that link gives you many other sites to try your hand on.

I chose to transcribe JB/002/153/001, which is part of Bentham’s economic writings entitled Annuity Notes, mostly because the handwriting looked pretty clear compared to some of the other pages I had seen.  I noticed that the process did get markedly easier I as I went through the document; I had more questionable “translations” in the first paragraph than the rest of the document.  Also, it was easier to decipher words that appeared multiple times.  Despite those advantages, there were still several words I was unsure of (one of which I am pretty sure is a name, so I don’t feel bad about being unable to decipher that one).  Like Cliffie, I asked my boyfriend to take a look, and he agreed on several of my translations and suggested others that made more sense.

I think transcription work like this naturally becomes a collaborative process, especially when issues of handwriting become involved.  When I was teaching, we used to get together with the other grade level teachers to calibrate norms and grade the written “constructed response” standardized test practice questions, and the process went much quicker when you had a colleague right next to you to help interpret handwriting, or to confirm or change your assessment.  I wonder if those of us with a background in English have a natural tendency to get a second pair of eyes to look over our work with our training in peer editing and/or workshopping?

Update: Turns out what I thought was a name (something Billy) was actually “Exchequer Bills”.   Not feeling bad about missing that!

Lost in Transcription

I choose to transcribe a page concerning the role of Judges in the court system.  The page looked rather simple–having had experience with the Shelley-Godwin archives in Technoromanticism–but I found it far more of a challenge than I anticipated.  Like Charity, I ran into some difficulties deciphering Bentham’s handwriting.  There were a number of words which I struggled to make out and had to leave as questionable if not unclear.  However, nothing bothered me quite so much as this particular word:

Screen Shot 2013-03-03 at 11.19.12 AM

My boyfriend and I puzzled over it for a long time, but were unable to come up with a satisfactory transcription.  I’m really hoping that someone can suggest something so that it I can stop obsessing about it.  If it helps, it is used in the following contexts:

1.  ”But [word here] who are designed by them Judges may be chosen by the People of their district”

2.  ”No harm will come from the connection which the [word here] may have in the country.”

I’m really hoping someone can see something that makes sense that alluded me.

Collaborative Transcriptions

I chose to transcribe and encode JB/051/376/002 for the Transcribe Bentham assignment (you should feel free to tackle pages 1 or 3 of the same folio – they are up for grabs!). Since I completed my transcribing/encoding process at work yesterday, when I came upon a particularly baffling phrase, I pulled in others from my office to help. This only happened a few times (I am still feeling fairly proud of myself for the relative ease with which I deciphered Bentham’s script), but the following phrase/word stumped us all:

Screen Shot 2013-03-01 at 8.45.37 PM

To clarify, the ENTIRE rest of the manuscript is written in English, without a whiff of another language in it (some of his others are written in French, I noticed), so I tried word after word after word (along with Nigel and another officemate). However, after many minutes of simply staring at the characters, willing them into some sort of coherency, I was finally forced to utilize the “?” tag, indicating a ‘questionable reading,’ and entering the phrase “In places.” So, you can imagine my eagerness when I woke up this morning with a response from Transcribe Bentham that my manuscript had been reviewed – I immediately went to the page to see what the “right” answer was – and my transcription had been changed to “Non placel.” Non placel? I thought, That’s not English, no wonder I couldn’t figure it out. Since I had involved two others in my efforts, I decided to update them via Twitter, including the 668k hashtag. Aaaaaand, check out my Storify below to see the resulting convo (it’s better if you click View as Slideshow – also, my post continues on underneath):

  1. Fri, Mar 01 2013 11:27:29

  2. @caritasity @trueXstory @boswells731 Probably “non placet”, literally “it does not please” in Latin.

    Fri, Mar 01 2013 11:29:30

  3. @BonifaceVIII @caritasity @boswells731 Ah, Latin. It gets you every time. ‘non placet’ makes much more sense.

    Fri, Mar 01 2013 11:30:37

  4. @trueXstory @BonifaceVIII @boswells731 – not necessarily in this context, though…? besides @TranscriBentham made the call. :P

    Fri, Mar 01 2013 11:37:08

  5. @caritasity @trueXstory @BonifaceVIII @boswells731 starting to think that ‘non placet’ is right! Will revise (thanks for the correction!)

    Fri, Mar 01 2013 12:09:04

  6. Fri, Mar 01 2013 12:09:18

  7. @BonifaceVIII – nice catch on the latin! i just wish i hadn’t spent a half-hour staring at that phrase with my english-only eyes. :P

    Fri, Mar 01 2013 12:20:42

Although most participants probably transcribe/encode individually, I couldn’t help but make this a collaborative activity, which seems in completely in alignment with the spirit of Transcribe Bentham (and the field of DH in general). Beyond the implicit communal nature of the project and the built-in collaboration between transcriber/encoder and the TB Editor, I was able to collaborate in person during my transcription process and digitally afterwards. The speedy response on Twitter from the TB Editor (I’m guessing Dr. Causer?) was both unexpected and gratifying, rendering the Project itself even more transparent. While I was initially skeptical of such an activity (Encoding? Isn’t that why I opted for topic modeling in Technoromanticism instead – to avoid this?), I’ve now concluded that Transcribe Bentham is something I’m definitely going to share with others and hope to revisit when I have more time (post-May!). It’s scholarly work saturated with social interaction, which is honestly how I like my academia served.

Folger Visit Photos

I got a couple requests to put my pictures from last night up on the blog, and I figured I’d share the non-collaged originals:

image-54

image-50

image-52 image-53 image-55

(Those of us trekking to the metro from the Hawk & Dove were at least pleased to pass by the scenic Capitol on our way!)

What an awesome hands-on visit to the Folger–thanks to all who played a role in organizing it!

Don’t Panic

Over the past week, it came to my attention that I have not been doing a very good job of not panicking in this class.  While I did suspect that Matt was not likely to assign a failing grade to the majority of the class for not having Paper Machines working by the end of the meeting (the stated assignment), I spent most of that session feeling miserably confused.  I probably looked quite grumpy.  (I apologize to anyone at whom I may have inadvertently frowned.)  While conversing with classmates in the days that followed about this thing that felt like a disaster — I had after all (for the first time ever) failed to complete a pass/fail assignment — I started slowly realizing that I may not be as hopelessly behind the curve as I felt.  From the start, I was uncertain what to make of the assertion that failure is a good part of DH work; I thought “That’s all very well if you’re trying to make something just because you want it, but what about when my grade/job depends on success?”  I realize that I have not been a very active participant in class so far, but I think I figured out that my real problem may not be that I am technologically inept (though I am), but that I habitually operate under assumptions about good academic work that are entirely incompatible the way DH defines good work.  It will not be easy to murder the little perfectionist angel/devil on my shoulder, but it will probably do me some good if I manage it.

So, moving on, I went in search of the reason I ever even considered signing up for this class.  Last year, I attended a Digital Dialogues lecture by Mike Witmore (the director of the Folger Shakespeare Library) called “Shakespeare from the Waist Down.”  I had seen flyers for other dialogues, but I didn’t think they applied to me (due to the technological ineptitude thing), but I was curious enough to go to this one because it mentioned Shakespeare in the title.  I was astonished by the idea that something as simple as pronoun patterns could enable a computer to tell the difference between comedy, history, and tragedy, and that it could identify the late romances (a modern editorial categorization).  The link to the podcast of that talk is here, if anyone wants to watch it:  http://mith.umd.edu/digitaldialogues/mp3/dd_2012_02_21.mov.

I am also really looking forward to the Folger visit tonight.  The Shakespeare Quartos Archive is the first thing we’ve studied that I’ve actually seen before!  I don’t know exactly what I may do, but I hope to pursue it further.  Collation and archiving seem the sorts of things I am most likely to use in the future, so I’m happy to be on somewhat more familiar territory!  So, stay tuned; I promise I’ll have something more interesting to say soon.

(And maybe, someday, I’ll even figure out how to take screenshots!)