Timeline for Our note in footnote of a book
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
7 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jun 17, 2020 at 9:43 | history | edited | CommunityBot |
Commonmark migration
|
|
| Apr 19, 2011 at 22:06 | comment | added | Andriy Drozdyuk | Hm.. sorry forget about translation. Imagine if I was writing this from scratch. | |
| Apr 15, 2011 at 18:41 | comment | added | Michael Lorton | So you have notes that appeared in the original quote, notes that appeared in your Russian version, and notes that you want to add in your English translation? I think the innermost notes should be marked as from Ivanov (if Ivanov were the original author), your Russian notes unmarked, and your latest additions marked "translator's note" (even though you are your own translator). | |
| Apr 15, 2011 at 16:53 | comment | added | Andriy Drozdyuk | No, sorry, I am "translating" a book that I wrote. | |
| Apr 15, 2011 at 15:50 | comment | added | Michael Lorton | @drozzy -- you are translating a book that has quotation from another source, with the quoter's comments interpolated in the quotations? Yikes. What Robert Graves did in the Claudius books (which of course purported to be mere translations) was mark his own comments with "RG" and put explanations Claudius was supposedly adding to letters and proclamations in square brackets unmarked, but you might want to use initials to distinguish every level of commenting. | |
| Apr 15, 2011 at 11:48 | comment | added | Andriy Drozdyuk | Thank you for desribing my question better than me :-) However, I really do need the distinction, as I am translating a book from another language, which uses this particular style. Also - they don't say "citation in the original" - but rather "ours" when it is theirs. | |
| Apr 15, 2011 at 3:19 | history | answered | Michael Lorton | CC BY-SA 3.0 |