<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Critical editions and explanatory notes</title>
	<atom:link href="http://blog.catherinepope.co.uk/2010/01/09/critical-editions-and-explanatory-notes/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://blog.catherinepope.co.uk/2010/01/09/critical-editions-and-explanatory-notes/</link>
	<description>Notes from a Victorianist</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Tue, 07 Sep 2010 21:24:50 +0100</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: catherine</title>
		<link>http://blog.catherinepope.co.uk/2010/01/09/critical-editions-and-explanatory-notes/comment-page-1/#comment-710</link>
		<dc:creator>catherine</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 17 Jan 2010 13:16:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.catherinepope.co.uk/?p=826#comment-710</guid>
		<description>Many thanks for your input, Nicole and Catalpa.  I shall bear your thoughts in mind for my next critical edition.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Many thanks for your input, Nicole and Catalpa.  I shall bear your thoughts in mind for my next critical edition.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: nicole</title>
		<link>http://blog.catherinepope.co.uk/2010/01/09/critical-editions-and-explanatory-notes/comment-page-1/#comment-701</link>
		<dc:creator>nicole</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 10 Jan 2010 21:49:21 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.catherinepope.co.uk/?p=826#comment-701</guid>
		<description>It&#039;s funny you should mention untranslated French, because I always get annoyed at footnotes for that--I think the note must be something interesting, then I lose my place only to find out something I already knew (i.e., the English), which is the same trouble as letting you know who Mozart is.

I do like explanatory notes though because they have the potential to be so valuable. It&#039;s really about giving info that you can&#039;t actually look up yourself because you have no way of knowing you should try--some allusion to a now-obscure novel that you would never even realize was anything special in the text without a real specialist to tell you.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>It&#8217;s funny you should mention untranslated French, because I always get annoyed at footnotes for that&#8211;I think the note must be something interesting, then I lose my place only to find out something I already knew (i.e., the English), which is the same trouble as letting you know who Mozart is.</p>
<p>I do like explanatory notes though because they have the potential to be so valuable. It&#8217;s really about giving info that you can&#8217;t actually look up yourself because you have no way of knowing you should try&#8211;some allusion to a now-obscure novel that you would never even realize was anything special in the text without a real specialist to tell you.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: catalpa</title>
		<link>http://blog.catherinepope.co.uk/2010/01/09/critical-editions-and-explanatory-notes/comment-page-1/#comment-700</link>
		<dc:creator>catalpa</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 09 Jan 2010 16:29:52 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.catherinepope.co.uk/?p=826#comment-700</guid>
		<description>I can see the benefit of such notes to some readers, and if your publisher is keen to sell the books into markets where knowledge of Mozart is abstruse, then there may be a call for them.  But since we now have access to thousands of reference tools through the internet, I think they could be dispensed with.  If nothing else, the reader is being deprived of the fun of of finding out what those words mean.  We don&#039;t generally define words that are rare but in current use; we expect readers to be able to use a dictionary.  They can use the net, or even an actual encyclopedia, in the same way, and will learn lots of other things in the process, like how to use a reference tool.

If they must be there, then I&#039;d rather footnotes than endnotes.  It&#039;s quite tiresome to turn to an endnote on Prince Albert, thinking you are going to find that the author had some particular relationship with him, only to be told that he was German and married to Queen Victoria, and then find you&#039;ve lost your place in the novel.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I can see the benefit of such notes to some readers, and if your publisher is keen to sell the books into markets where knowledge of Mozart is abstruse, then there may be a call for them.  But since we now have access to thousands of reference tools through the internet, I think they could be dispensed with.  If nothing else, the reader is being deprived of the fun of of finding out what those words mean.  We don&#8217;t generally define words that are rare but in current use; we expect readers to be able to use a dictionary.  They can use the net, or even an actual encyclopedia, in the same way, and will learn lots of other things in the process, like how to use a reference tool.</p>
<p>If they must be there, then I&#8217;d rather footnotes than endnotes.  It&#8217;s quite tiresome to turn to an endnote on Prince Albert, thinking you are going to find that the author had some particular relationship with him, only to be told that he was German and married to Queen Victoria, and then find you&#8217;ve lost your place in the novel.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
