Help Decipher Shorthand?

[shanreagh]

' I decided to use a modern approach to answer this question and uploaded the image into Google Bard and asked it to decipher it.'

This looks to be a great resource. On this board we have requests for shorthand 'translations' from time to time. 

Is this the website?
https://bard.google.com/

[Nickolaus81]

Yes, that is the site.
I am not sure if I can share a link since I am new to this forum but here is a link for the conversation with Bard.  It can help to have examples of how to prompt it.

https://g.co/bard/share/734d14516146

[Whipby]

I’m confused! The translation offered by the bard doesn’t seem to relate in any way to the shorthand passage posted.  Am I missing something?

[Greensleeves]

It can't be Teeline shorthand as that wasn't developed until 1968.  I agree with the original suggestion that it's Pitman.  Having been a Pitman shorthand writer for many years I agree with the attempt made earlier by Chris23005.  However as shorthand writers will know, we all develop our own idiosyncrasies so it would be very hard, if not impossible, to run someone's shorthand through an 'app' and get a reasonable transcription.  And equally it is hard for shorthand writers to transcribe others' notes.

Regards
GS

[Nickolaus81]

I agree that AI can come up with incorrect results, but I provided the translation because it seemed like a very logical translation.  The Daughter's of the American Revolution are very much dedicated to gathering information about the descendants of people who fought in the American Revolution.  The context of the translation made sense and the full translation was logical and grammatically correct.  Since AI is very dependent upon data that already exists though, it is possible that it just tied its translation attempt to a note from the D.A.R. that already exists somewhere and didn't actually generate that translation.
The previous manual attempt provided here didn't make much sense at all though.

[Greensleeves]

I disagree that the previous manual attempt at translation made no sense.  If you were able to read Pitman shorthand, you would see that what the transcriber wrote coincided with the written shorthand outlines.  The fact that there are gaps means the writer chose to admit uncertainty rather than plough on & make things up - as has already been stated, shorthand writers do tend to devise their own outlines & shortforms, which is why trying to transcribe someone else's shorthand is fraught with difficulties.  In addition you informed us that the bard identified the shorthand as Teeline.  As we know this piece was written a very long time ago, and as Teeline wasn't devised until the 1960s,  there's no way that shorthand can be Teeline.

[BumbleB]

VERY late to the party - BUT that is definitely Pitman.  And as stated by Greensleeves, we all had our own "take" on some outlines. 

[Nickolaus81]

The hotel mentioned in the clipping was founded in 1916 so the writing would have had to have been more recent than that, if the clipping actually corresponds to the shorthand writing.
That would conflict with the date that Bard came up with, but it would also indicate that the writing isn't particularly old.  The DAR was founded in 1890, so it couldn't have been any older than that, for sure, if the clipping corresponds to the shorthand writing.

I just went through and asked Bard some probing questions regarding the accuracy.  Those details are added to the chat link previously provided.  Bard stated that it was able to map the symbols to a Teeline dictionary with 98% accuracy and 2% was interpolated based on context cues.    I also probed it regarding the accuracy of the date and it analyzed the image again and came up with 1990.