Re: Plane 1 maths fraktur in textual apparatus?

From: John Cowan (
Date: Mon Nov 11 2002 - 09:51:21 EST

  • Next message: Michael Everson: "Re: Plane 1 maths fraktur in textual apparatus?" scripsit:

    > The use of Fraktur in Greek and Hebrew apparatus is not as variables, which
    > denote some particular attribute but have no specific value; they are
    > symbols with specific meaning, more comparable to letters denoting units of
    > measure.

    I think that's a nonessential difference. We call them variables because
    most of them are, but no mathematician would take MATHEMATICAL ITALIC SMALL PI
    or MATHEMATICAL ITALIC SMALL E to be anything but constants.
    Likewise your Fraktur apparatus letters are constants, though bound not
    to mathematical objects but to manuscript objects.

    > 4. Use Fraktur math symbols. Cons: I can't think of any, though we'd still
    > want to promote consensus among the Biblical studies community on using
    > this.


    John Cowan
    Promises become binding when there is a meeting of the minds and consideration
    is exchanged. So it was at King's Bench in common law England; so it was
    under the common law in the American colonies; so it was through more than
    two centuries of jurisprudence in this country; and so it is today. 
           --_Specht v. Netscape_

    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Mon Nov 11 2002 - 10:31:57 EST