RootsChat.Com

General => The Common Room => The Lighter Side => Topic started by: Xinia :) on Sunday 17 June 18 15:14 BST (UK)

Title: Transcriptions
Post by: Xinia :) on Sunday 17 June 18 15:14 BST (UK)
How darned ignorant and bad mannered and insulting is it to transcribe the word ADOPTED TO ADAPTED  ---

silly easy error to make I know, slip of the fingers I know.. But for the family of the person involved not nice.

But then that is only M.O.  it did rile me though .. maybe you can tell    ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D  have I got a hang up... Well maybe... who knows..



xin
Title: Re: Transcriptions
Post by: groom on Sunday 17 June 18 18:51 BST (UK)
Surely though Xin, we are always being told that transcribers have to write what they see, not what they know it should be?
Title: Re: Transcriptions
Post by: Xinia :) on Sunday 17 June 18 18:53 BST (UK)
oooo  sorry  --- silly me



 ;) ;D ;D ;D

xin

Title: Re: Transcriptions
Post by: BillyF on Tuesday 26 June 18 18:57 BST (UK)
It`s easy to make a slip of the fingers, I do it all the time, but it may just as Groom says the transcriber put what they saw. The a would be usually be  on the left of the keyboard, the o on the right, a slip might have used the i.

PS: just had to make an adjustment, I`d typed aslip and not a slip !!!!!!
Title: Re: Transcriptions
Post by: carol8353 on Tuesday 26 June 18 23:20 BST (UK)
A lot of these transcriptions were done by people for whom English is not their first language.

So as Groom pointed out they will have been told to transcribe what they think it says.

Carol
Title: Re: Transcriptions
Post by: majm on Wednesday 27 June 18 04:00 BST (UK)
I agree Xin ... and if I were transcribing, I would expect to be transcribing handwriting in a language with which I was familiar.

ADD, so if reading and transcribing documentation regarding something to do with someone's birth, I am sure I would read 'adopted' rather than 'adapted' ...

FURTHER ADD ... tis not a slip of the fingers ... on a qwerty board, 'a' is left hand, little finger; 'o' is right hand, ring finger.  And they are on different lines....  ::)  ::)  ::) Tis as you wrote 'darned ignorant ...'  I think it is also POOR OVERSIGHTING by the transcribing team leader/s. 

JM
Title: Re: Transcriptions
Post by: Erato on Wednesday 27 June 18 04:46 BST (UK)
"have I got a hang up..."

Yes.
Title: Re: Transcriptions
Post by: Guy Etchells on Wednesday 27 June 18 06:29 BST (UK)
I agree Xin ... and if I were transcribing, I would expect to be transcribing handwriting in a language with which I was familiar.

ADD, so if reading and transcribing documentation regarding something to do with someone's birth, I am sure I would read 'adopted' rather than 'adapted' ...

FURTHER ADD ... tis not a slip of the fingers ... on a qwerty board, 'a' is left hand, little finger; 'o' is right hand, ring finger.  And they are on different lines....  ::)  ::)  ::) Tis as you wrote 'darned ignorant ...'  I think it is also POOR OVERSIGHTING by the transcribing team leader/s. 

JM

What was actually written?
It is all very well saying I would expect this or that but before making a comment I would like to see the original image.
It may be that the original image clearly shows an "a" rather than an "o", if so it would be totally irresponsible to change what was clearly written just because one thinks it made more sense.

There are a number of reasons why adapted would be correct in the above case but without knowing the full details the reason cannot be explained.

Cheers
Guy
Title: Re: Transcriptions
Post by: groom on Wednesday 27 June 18 09:12 BST (UK)
I agree with Guy. There has to be a rule when transcribing, and I’ve always been told that is put what you see, not what you think. If not you could have every transcriber deciding that what was written wasn’t correct and changing it to what they thought it should be. Probably another reason why it is always best to look at images rather than transcriptions where possible.
Title: Re: Transcriptions
Post by: majm on Wednesday 27 June 18 09:32 BST (UK)
Attaching a snip of the snip  :)  When I have been transcribing, I have always worked as part of a team, so sometimes I am checking someone else's work, and  other times someone else is checking my work.  Usually several checks actually.  Sometimes I have been a team leader, and sometimes I have worked under a team leader. 

We have always been encouraged to transcribe bearing in mind the context, so IF transcribing something to do with a birth and a relationship to the head of the household, if given the choice of ADAPTED or ADOPTED ... I am sure to read it as adopted.   Perhaps transcribing principles are slightly different from U.K. rules ... I am in NSW Australia, and have been transcribing 19th century long hand since err ... early 1970s.   

I agree though that it is best for each researcher to seek out the original document rather than rely on any transcription, provided of course they are familiar with the context, and the longhand script and the nuances of the written language used. 


JM
Title: Re: Transcriptions
Post by: carol8353 on Wednesday 27 June 18 09:36 BST (UK)
Am I missing something as I still don't see the original image,just the transcription?

Adoption didn't start legally until 1927,so it would have been a strange word to use back then.
Title: Re: Transcriptions
Post by: groom on Wednesday 27 June 18 09:45 BST (UK)
Am I missing something as I still don't see the original image,just the transcription?

Adoption didn't start legally until 1927,so it would have been a strange word to use back then.

I was about to say the same Carol.

Looking at transcription rules for a site such as FreeCen it says

“The general rule will be that data will be transcribed 'as is'. There will be some (few) variations to this, to be described later, in detail. “
Title: Re: Transcriptions
Post by: Xinia :) on Wednesday 27 June 18 10:19 BST (UK)
Yes ---- I comprehend the rules    ----

and I am NOT a rule breaker  -

But where is COMMONSENSE

so adopted was not a word commonly used in 1927  -- IT IS today -

this is why I could never be a transcriber - I would have to read and transcribe what I KNOW it says... in 'XINS' head.. which sometimes is (sssshhhhhh dont tell anyone) Incorrect.

like the bit I put on here the other day regarding me reading a Baptism.
http://www.rootschat.com/forum/index.php?topic=795764.msg6524762#msg6524762

I just get so fed up of silly errors..

YES abide by the rules, of course -- but can they not double check a place name or look it up..

Anyway too busy catching the Rays to follow the dead rellies for 24hrs... :)  might visit a cemetary or two..

see if they put the correct name on the gravestone.. :)  ha ha..

xin


Title: Re: Transcriptions
Post by: Xinia :) on Wednesday 27 June 18 10:26 BST (UK)
here are the bits? 

see what you think..
Title: Re: Transcriptions
Post by: majm on Wednesday 27 June 18 10:27 BST (UK)
 :)  And, of course, regardless of when formal adoptions commenced, there were children who were informally adopted right across the 19th Century. 

 :) In my experience, across NSW throughout the 19th century, children were informally adopted within their extended family, while children who were raised within a family who were not related to the child, ie a formal relationship established via the Colonial office's Boarding Out Officer, were noted as fostered. 

 :) I would add, that in my experience, ''Adopted" is a word that was frequently used in NSW official records, and as many of those who raised those official records were migrants from the U.K. it may well be they were basing their use of English words on their own understanding of the words used in their life in England.

JM
Title: Re: Transcriptions
Post by: majm on Wednesday 27 June 18 10:27 BST (UK)
I read it as Adopted.

JM
Title: Re: Transcriptions
Post by: Guy Etchells on Wednesday 27 June 18 18:11 BST (UK)
I read it as Adopted.

JM

Yes very clear to me also.
Cheers
Guy
Title: Re: Transcriptions
Post by: BillyF on Wednesday 27 June 18 18:57 BST (UK)
yes, my first glance- read adopted.
Title: Re: Transcriptions
Post by: majm on Thursday 28 June 18 02:11 BST (UK)
 :)  :)  I would also expect all RChatters who are familiar with looking at UK Census, to also recognise that the enumerator's scribble to the immediate right of the word Nephew is for the word  'Unmarried'; hopefully the transcriber who determined the word was 'Adapted' was not required to transcribe the scribble for 'Unmarried'.   :)

JM     :)
Title: Re: Transcriptions
Post by: groom on Thursday 28 June 18 08:06 BST (UK)
:)  :)  I would also expect all RChatters who are familiar with looking at UK Census, to also recognise that the enumerator's scribble to the immediate right of the word Nephew is for the word  'Unmarried'; hopefully the transcriber who determined the word was 'Adapted' was not required to transcribe the scribble for 'Unmarried'.   :)

JM     :)

Which goes back to the importance of looking at images rather than relying on transcriptions and then making up your own mind. Which is surely something that all serious genealogists try and do, they never accept anything second hand as the truth.