Notes to the CRLN electronic edition

The original structure of each bibliography has been maintained except for the following cases:

1) Only published works were included in the electronic edition (Early issues included works "awaiting publication" and "in progress.").
2) Peripheral material, such as abstracts, reviews and annotations were not included in the electronic edition.
3) I have done away with all italics and underlining for sources in the corpus of bibliographies.

The language categories from the early issues have been shortened or abbreviated as follows:

LING "Linguistics" general linguistics studies including phonetics, teaching methods and translation techniques
ROM "Romance" general comparative Romance and Vulgar Latin (VL), though the latter often appears separately
CAT "Catalan"
FREN "French" and "Provençal" (PROV), though the latter often appears separately
ITAL "Italian" and "Sardinian" (SARD), though the latter more often appears separately
PORT "Portuguese"
RUM "Rumanian" sometimes referred to as "Balkan Romance" (BALK ROM)
SPAN "Spanish" as well as Basque and Judeo-Spanish
MISC "Miscellaneous" items received too late to be included in previous issues

The early issues contained bibliography items in numbers 1 and 2 of each volume; number 1 of each volume was compiled by the editor based on a questionnaire sent to the membership. This format is maintained in the electronic bibliographies. Also, in many early issues bibliographers subdivided their compilations into "Reviews", "Articles", and "Books and Dissertations"; thus, not all of the early compilations are in strict alphabetical order.

The bulk of the bibliographies were scanned using Omni-Page Pro Version 8.0 with Microsoft Word 97. In some cases the copy was of such poor quality that entries had to be typed. The bibliographies were then proofed in MS Word 97, saved in ascii format, transferred to a unix server, and there coded for html using the vi editor. Given the size of the corpus, this method was much faster than exporting directly to html from MS Word 97, which, in any case, tended to produce an enormous amount of unwanted code. Also, I found this method the best way to handle diacritics, which could be replaced globally with their html character entities directly in MS Word. Thanks to advancing technologies, .pdf or .doc/.wpd files have become the norm for the electronic edition since 2001.

Converting the bibliographies produced more 'copy' errors with the data than one finds in the original bibliographies. This is due to various factors, including the condition of the original or xeroxed bibliographies, the fact that many bibliographers used underlined or italicized text, which does not scan as well as plain text, and, in particular, the difficulty that the scanner had interpreting diacritics. Priority was and continues to be given to html conversion of the bulk of the issues; the task of perfecting the data corpus is seen as an ongoing one. You are invited to send notes for correction or emendation to the project director.

Brian Imhoff, Project Director