Wikidata:Property proposal/Transcribed by

transcribed by

Originally proposed at Wikidata:Property proposal/Creative work

   Done: transcribed by (P11603) (Talk and documentation)

Description	person who has made a copy of a manuscript text
Represents	copyist (Q3997704)
Data type	Item
Domain	item; human (Q5)
Example 1	Old English Rune Poem (Q7083931) transcribed by→ Humfrey Wanley (Q5940778)
Example 2	Finnesburg Fragment (Q2192066) transcribed by→ George Hickes (Q5540582)
Example 3	The Battle of Maldon (Q1700507) transcribed by→ David Casley (Q18730137)
Single-value constraint	no
Distinct-values constraint	no

Motivation

I am proposing a property 'transcribed by', or 'transcriber', or 'copied by', as there exist Old English texts which only exist in the present day because a transcription was made of them. For instance, Humphrey Wanley made a transcription of the Old English Rune Poem (Q7083931), and George Hickes transcribed the Finnsburg Fragment (Q2192066) [which is different to the Finnsburg Episode, which is a similar tract of text within the Beowulf poem], and the original manuscripts were lost before modern editors would consult them, so we only have the transcription as a source. Medievalfran (talk) 15:55, 7 September 2022 (UTC)

Discussion

 Comment This proposal cannot move forward until there are at least three examples. UWashPrincipalCataloger (talk) 19:32, 7 September 2022 (UTC)

--- thank you, @UWashPrincipalCataloger:, I was struggling with the template but think I've worked it out! Medievalfran (talk) 09:11, 8 September 2022 (UTC)

•  Support UWashPrincipalCataloger (talk) 23:43, 8 September 2022 (UTC)
•  Support --Gymnicus (talk) 15:02, 12 September 2022 (UTC)
•  Comment I think we need to think about this. What kind of objects in the FRBR hierarchy should be allowed to carry this property? Is the work Old English Rune Poem (Q7083931) the same as its transcription by Wanley? What if another transcription one day turned up? What statements should items that this is used on be carrying, to indicate that they are transcriptions of objects (with items of their own?) that are now presumed lost? What if another transcription one day turned up? @UWashPrincipalCataloger: you've given a 'support' above: how would you see this property best being used, and what patterns do you think we should be expecting to see see in and around objects it is used on? Jheald (talk) 15:40, 12 September 2022 (UTC)

Jheald: RDA (Resource Description & Access), the cataloguing standard based on IFLA LRM (FRBR is now obsolete, having been replaced by IFLA Library Reference Model (Q54410458)), has the relationship element "transcriber agent": "An agent who contributes to an expression by writing down or notating unwritten or unnotated content, or by changing it from one system of notation to another. Transcription of a musical work for a different instrument or performing group is excluded." The domain of this element is expression and the range is agent. There are also narrower elements "transcriber person", "transcriber collective agent", "transcriber corporate body", and "transcriber family." The RDA element "transcriber agent" is mapped to the IFLA LRM property "was created by expression": "Relates an expression to an agent responsible for the realization of a work."

In Wikidata terms, the FRBR/IFLA LRM entity expression corresponds most directly to version, edition or translation (Q3331189), so presumably a restriction on use of this proposed property is that it can only be used on items that are instances of version, edition or translation (Q3331189). UWashPrincipalCataloger (talk) 06:36, 13 September 2022 (UTC)

Interesting points! In the case of the rune poem (Q7083931), the poem does not exist in any 'original' form. Whether we treat this item as representing the abstract concept of the poem, or the poem as it once existed in a medieval manuscript, the poem only exists today through the transcription. If another transcription one day turned up then surely another 'transcribed by' could be added? If the original one day turned up (making a miraculous escape from the Ashburnham House fire), then the property 'transcribed by' would also still stand, in my understanding.

In the specific case of (Q7083931), it is notable that at present the image which is linked to this item is in fact a photograph of the transcription. Would it be suggested, then, that the Rune Poem should exist as two separate items: one item for the lost medieval poem, another for the the transcription? And in any case, would it not still be useful to have the information that the poem is transcribed by Wanley?

My knowledge is restricted to early medieval manuscripts, but I do wonder whether there are further instances of 'lost originals' which only exist in transcription. (Which, from my understanding, is different to a version, edition, or translation). Medievalfran (talk) 12:43, 5 October 2022 (UTC)

looking to give this a new year's nudge. Are there any further support/oppose/comments? Medievalfran (talk) 15:43, 6 January 2023 (UTC)

•  Support, seems like a necessary and useful property for literature, but also originally spoken works that need to be transmitted into written language (so maybe the description referring to the property as only manuscript copies of other manuscripts could be limiting), even if the transcribed text is not 100% the same as the original, it's interesting to know who was responsible for having that text still living somehow in another form from an archivistic perspective. I also can't seem to find a "translated by" property, only the item translated edition (Q39811647) and the properties translation of (P9745) and has edition or translation (P747). –Guttitto (talk) 22:51, 19 January 2023 (UTC)
• @Medievalfran, Gymnicus, Jheald, Guttitto:  Done as transcribed by (P11603). AdamSeattle (talk) 19:57, 18 February 2023 (UTC)
  • Woo! This is very cool to see. Thanks @AdamSeattle:. I would like to add a little +1 for the point raised by @Guttitto: - it may be useful to expand out the definition such that it also applies to aural transcription. I'm thinking here about eg. endangered languages, or transcriptions made by folk song collectors (for instance Cecil Sharpe in England). Thanks all for the perspectives on this! Medievalfran (talk) 23:54, 9 March 2023 (UTC)