some notes on the esposizioni
I am encoding the second chunk of the Esposizioni. When the two chunks will be put together, we must remember to do the following:
- in the first chunk, change “Orco” from “place” to “mythentity” as it can mean both “inferno” and “Plutone”.
- make sure that all the terms for “angelo” “arcangelo” “demone” and their variations (”angiolo” etc.) - so, basically, all the terms for “devil” and angel”, also in the SINGULAR - are encoded in the first chunk. I have been consistent in encoding them in the second chunk, but now I have realized I might not have encoded all the occurrences in the first chunk. Terms like that, generic and singular, are more important in the second chunk than in the first. That is why I have decided to encode them, but we must check the consistency in the first chunk.
- All the “Oceano” occurrences must be checked with attention. Myth-entity or place? It seems to depend on the context. Furthermore, there are many “Oceano”s: Oceano orientale, atlantico, etiopico etc.
- Both pagan divinities (”Venere”, “Giove” etc.) and Christian saints (”Santa Lucia” etc) can be also temples and churches, thus not only “persons” (mythical or not) but also “places”.
- I agree with Mike on the names of the planets: they should not be considered as possible destinations, even though A. Warburg wrote an essay on this topic, and the idea of “astronaut” was not unknown in tha Middle Ages (most of Warburg’s examples are from the early Renaissance, but with medieval antecedents).
- In the second chunk, the whole part dealing with “Plutone” is particularly messy and unclear (for example: there are many references to what I have labeled as “mythentities”, Sicilian mountains that are also Greek gods etc.) Thus, when the time comes, please read it and double check my encoding with particular attention.
Ok, I think it is all for now.
Roberto Bacci
The most important thing I’d like to add to Roberto’s comments is the fact that he’s doing an absolutely incredibly good job on this difficult endeavor. The second chunk will indeed present some problems and will require a yeoman’s effort from all of us. I’d like to say, furthermore, that - though I spent a long time on the English - I’ve found no small number of mistakes that I made. These corrections (or suggestions for corrections) are all over on the PEOPLE-PLACE sub-blog. I could certainly benefit from the help of anyone interested in doing some authentic page-turning.
As has been mentioned here on the regular blog, or I think it’s safe to say suggested, there are and will continue to be ever more names that simply cannot be adequately “translated” without resorting to annotation. Once again, the computer is forcing us to pick a color for some grey areas. I really do think that we would get a lot out of a discussion on how and when to annotate.
Lastly, regarding the question of entities, let’s let future applications be our guide. I realize that what I’ve just written doesn’t yet mean anything, but if we had in mind the generation, say, of indices organized by entity groups it would not only be helpful for the initial encoding but also for beginning to tackle other related questions, such as the relationships between those terms (like gods and mountains) that will necessarily have to faced at some point.
Thanks for your patience,
M