July 15, 2014 Journal article Open Access

Giannouli, Antonia

JSON-LD (schema.org) Export

{"@context":"https://schema.org/","@id":"http://doi.org/10.25592/uhhfdm.605","@type":"ScholarlyArticle","creator":[{"@type":"Person","name":"Giannouli, Antonia"}],"datePublished":"2014-07-15","description":"<p>The tendencies of Byzantine authors and scribes with regard to punctuation, orthography or accentuation, based on such trustworthy witnesses as an autograph, a copy corrected or dictated by the author himself, have been the subject of individual analyses or integrated into editions. Yet, modern editors still waver between their normalization and their adoption.&nbsp;On the one hand, this diversity in editorial principles points to the need for a systematic study of authorial and scribal habits and their evolution throughout the Byzantine period. On the other, an ever more urgent issue is how the results of such a study would affect textual criticism and editing techniques. The observations outlined below apply to literary texts, written in prose and in learned language.</p>","headline":"Byzantine punctuation and orthography. Between normalisation and respect of the manuscripts. Introductory remarks","identifier":"http://doi.org/10.25592/uhhfdm.605","image":"https://zenodo.org/static/img/logos/zenodo-gradient-round.svg","keywords":["Manuscript Studies","Byzantine Studies","Philology","Text criticism","Punctuation","Scribal practice"],"license":"https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/legalcode","name":"Byzantine punctuation and orthography. Between normalisation and respect of the manuscripts. Introductory remarks","url":"https://www.fdr.uni-hamburg.de/record/605"}