Annotation Publication/20161024/163 (2016/12/12-15.11.20) (archived)   O.claud.1.152 standard November 05, 2016 19:59
Annotation Publication/20161024/164 (2016/12/12-15.11.20) (archived)   O.claud.1.152 original November 05, 2016 20:00
Annotation Publication/20161024/165 (2016/12/12-15.11.20) (archived)   O.claud. 1.153 standard November 05, 2016 20:04
Annotation Publication/20161024/166 (2016/12/12-15.11.20) (archived)   O.claud. 1.153 original November 05, 2016 20:04
Annotation Publication/20161024/165 (2016/12/12-15.11.20) (archived)   O.claud. 1.153 standard November 05, 2016 20:24
Annotation Publication/20161024/166 (2016/12/12-15.11.20) (archived)   O.claud. 1.153 original November 05, 2016 20:25
Annotation Publication/20161024/163 (2016/12/12-15.11.20) (archived)   O.claud.1.152 standard November 05, 2016 20:29
Annotation Publication/20161024/164 (2016/12/12-15.11.20) (archived)   O.claud. 1.152 original November 05, 2016 20:29
Annotation Publication/20161024/165 (2016/12/12-15.11.20) (archived)   Tässä korjattu versio November 09, 2016 20:45
Annotation Publication/20161024/166 (2016/12/12-15.11.20) (archived)   Korjattu versio November 09, 2016 20:46
Annotation Publication/20161024/164 (2016/12/12-15.11.20) (archived)   Korjattu versio November 09, 2016 20:47
Annotation Publication/20161031/9 (2016/12/12-15.11.19) (archived)   Tässä on etenkin 4. lauseessa kohtia, joista olen epävarma, mm., miten sana ἀλλὰ pitäisi merkitä. Voiko sanan λειGG tulkita predikaattina, vai onko parempi jättää avoimeksi? Lauseessa 2 πρὸ παντὸς on editiossa käännetty 'First of all': sopiiko se merkitä AuxP ja AuxY, kuten olen tehnyt, vai mieluummin AuxP ja ADV, tai jotenkin muuten? November 11, 2016 14:06
Annotation Publication/20161031/10 (2016/12/12-15.11.19) (archived)   4. lauseessa nimen Sklylenas tms. perusmuodon jätin avoimeksi, sopiiko tämä vai ei? Nimen lukutapa ja nom.-muoto ovat epävarmoja (Sklylena tai Sklylenas, ehkä). Se saattaa edition mukaan olla genetiivi (Kassios Skl.:n poika) tai nominatiivi (Kassios Skl.). 'Kasiksen' merkitsin 'Kassiokseksi', mutta huomasin, että κάσις voi tarkoittaa myös 'veljeä', jolloin kai voisi kyseessä olla 'veli Sklylenas' tai 'Sklylenaan veli'. Pitäisikö lemmaksi sittenkin merkitä tekstissä oleva muoto? November 11, 2016 14:18
Annotation Publication/20161031/12 (2016/12/12-15.11.19) (archived)   Lauseen 3 olen annotoinut ikään kuin siinä oli acc. c. inf. -rakenne (eroto se pempsai, tms.). Onko tämä hyvä, vai onko parempi olettaa, että kirjurilla on ollut mielessään sivulauserakenne (eroto se, oti..., tms.)? November 11, 2016 17:22
Annotation Publication/20161031/11 (2016/12/12-15.11.19) (archived)   Sama kysymys koskee lausetta 3, kuin standardissa November 11, 2016 17:23
Annotation Publication/20161031/11 (2016/12/12-15.11.19) (archived)   With corrections November 18, 2016 18:21
Annotation Publication/20161031/9 (2016/12/12-15.11.19) (archived)   With corrections November 18, 2016 18:21
Annotation Publication/20161031/10 (2016/12/12-15.11.19) (archived)   Corrected November 18, 2016 18:22
Annotation Publication/20161031/12 (2016/12/12-15.11.19) (archived)   Corrected November 18, 2016 18:22
Annotation Publication/20161111/5 (2016/12/12-15.11.19) (archived)   O.claud.1.156 original November 24, 2016 20:11
Annotation Publication/20161111/4 (2016/12/12-15.11.19) (archived)   O.Claud.1.156 standard November 24, 2016 20:12
Annotation Publication/20161111/4 (2016/12/12-15.11.19) (archived)   Selvä December 04, 2016 16:11
Annotation Publication/20161111/5 (2016/12/12-15.11.19) (archived)   Tein ehdottamasi muutokset - tulkintasi on minunkin mielestäni parempi December 04, 2016 16:12
Annotation Publication/20161111/6 (2017/01/10-14.38.03) (archived)   Tässä o.claud. 1.157, standardiversio December 04, 2016 16:30
Annotation Publication/20161111/7 (2017/01/10-14.38.03) (archived)   Ja o.claud.1.157 originaali December 04, 2016 16:30
Annotation Publication/20161122/33 (2017/01/10-14.38.04) (archived)   Tässä o.claud.1.158 standardi. 2. lauseessa olen epävarma, kuinka 'eis o thelei' tulisi annotoida. December 04, 2016 16:50
Annotation Publication/20161122/34 (2017/01/10-14.38.04) (archived)   O.claud.1.158 original. Kuinka 3. lauseessa on huomioitava fem.-artikkelin käyttö määreenä eranarkhes-sanalle, jonka ediittori arvelee kuitenkin viittaavaan mieshenkilöön? December 04, 2016 16:51
Annotation Publication/20161111/5 (2016/12/12-15.11.19) (archived)   Olenpa hajamielinen - no nyt pitäisi olla kaiken kunnossa December 08, 2016 15:21
Annotation Publication/20161111/4 (2016/12/12-15.11.19) (archived)   Nominatiivi korjattu ... December 08, 2016 15:22
Annotation Publication/20161111/6 (2017/01/10-14.38.03) (archived)   Onko nyt kaikki oikein? Teksti on tosiaan selvempi näin. Katsoin liikaa käännöstä ja yritin tulkita sen mukaan. December 08, 2016 15:44
Annotation Publication/20161111/7 (2017/01/10-14.38.03) (archived)   Tässä myös originaali December 08, 2016 15:46
Annotation Publication/20161122/33 (2017/01/10-14.38.04) (archived)   Okei, tein korjaukset. Pitäisikö 2. lauseessa σὺ ymmärtää vokatiiviksi vai nominatiiviksi, mikäli se merkitään subjektina? December 08, 2016 15:53
Annotation Publication/20161122/34 (2017/01/10-14.38.04) (archived)   Sama kysymys, kuin standaridissa December 08, 2016 15:53
Annotation Publication/20161122/35 (2017/02/25-12.01.59) (archived)   Lause 2 on vähän kryptinen, en oikein käsitä, mistä siinä on kyse. Tulisiko παρασχάμενος tulkita verbin παρασχάζω ("lävistää"?)vai παρέχω (pro παρασχόμενος) muodoksi? Entä onko λύσις tulkittava mielestäsi verbiksi vai substantiiviksi? Ediittori ehdottaa, että merkitys on ἀπολύσεις. Liittyisikö παρασχάμενος silloin tähän verbiin vai alun 'kalos poeiseis'-ilmaisuun? ποιειν lukutapa on myös epävarma (voisiko olla finiittinen muoto? voi myös ehkä liittyä edellisen rivin päättävään τομενε:een.) December 11, 2016 22:40
Annotation Publication/20161122/36 (2017/02/25-12.01.59) (archived)   Tässä samat kysymykset kuin standardikerroksessa December 11, 2016 22:41
Annotation Publication/2016128/6 (2017/01/10-14.38.05) (archived)   Hei. Tässä 3. lauseen ὀυδέν on hieman pulmallinen. Spiritus pitäisi kaiketi standardissa siirtää ypsilonin päälle. Originaalissa lukee kuitenkin ὀδέεν. Painetussa editiossa sen sijaan lukee ὁδὲ ἕν, mutta käännöksessä "nothing". Miten minun pitäisi toimin? οὐδέν vaikuttaa minusta tässä ihan hyvältä tulkinnalta. December 11, 2016 23:07
Annotation Publication/2016128/7 (2017/01/10-14.38.05) (archived)   Samat jutut kuin standardissa December 11, 2016 23:08
Annotation Publication/20161122/34 (2017/01/10-14.38.04) (archived)   Kiitos. Nyt pitäisi olla kunnossa. December 25, 2016 20:27
Annotation Publication/20161122/33 (2017/01/10-14.38.04) (archived)   Kiitos, nyt pitäisi olla kaiken kunnossa. December 25, 2016 20:29
Annotation Publication/20161111/7 (2017/01/10-14.38.03) (archived)   Okei, tässä December 25, 2016 20:30
Annotation Publication/20161111/6 (2017/01/10-14.38.03) (archived)   Tosiaan, kiitos! December 25, 2016 20:32
Annotation Publication/2016128/6 (2017/01/10-14.38.05) (archived)   Okei, tässä December 25, 2016 22:01
Annotation Publication/2016128/7 (2017/01/10-14.38.05) (archived)   Ja tässä originaali December 25, 2016 22:02
Annotation Publication/20161211/1 (2017/01/12-16.43.46) (archived)   3. lause: pitäisikö μου olla näin (ATR sanalle ἄρτους) vai ennemmin sanaan ἦρκας liittyvä ADV ("minulta" – en tosin tiedä, olisiko tämä kieliopillisesti oikein)? Lauseet 4–6 olivat alun perin samassa, mutta erotin ne toisistaan. Painetun edition mukaan καὶ ὕπαγε κτλ. on kirjoitettu ylösalaisin ylämarginaaliin; tässä taas on (lauseessa 6) ennen tekstin viimeistä sanaa jätetty huomautus: "Writing inverse to main text". Voinko poistaa eng. tekstin? Tuli tosin mieleeni, liittyyköhän lähettäjän nimi (Ailouras), jos se on ainoa muusta tekstistä erilleen kirjoitettu sana, muuhun tekstiin syntaktisesti lainkaan, ja voikohan se mahdollisesti olla jopa (toisen käden tekemä?) myöhempi lisäys? Voisin käydä katsomassa valokuvaa, mutten tiedä onko siitä paljon apua, koska en ole tottunut näitä katsomaan. December 25, 2016 23:12
Annotation Publication/20161211/2 (2017/01/12-16.43.46) (archived)   Tästä kysyisin samoja asioita, joita standardista December 25, 2016 23:12
Annotation Publication/20161014/16 (2017/01/10-14.38.04) (archived)   Laitan nyt vielä näitä, jotka vein aiemmin Sematiaan, ja joissa näkyy siellä se punainen, avonainen lukko, mistä aiemmin lähetin sähköpostia. Tässä o.claud.1.146 standardi. December 26, 2016 20:36
Annotation Publication/20161014/13 (2017/01/12-16.43.48) (archived)   Ja o.claud.1.146 originaali December 26, 2016 20:37
Annotation Publication/20161014/17 (2017/01/10-14.38.03) (archived)   O.claud.1.147standardi December 26, 2016 20:38
Annotation Publication/20161014/20 (2017/01/10-14.38.03) (archived)   o.claud.1.147 originaali December 26, 2016 20:39
Annotation Publication/20161016/16 (2017/01/10-14.38.04) (archived)   o.claud.1.148 hand 1, original December 26, 2016 20:41
Annotation Publication/20161016/13 (2017/01/10-14.38.04) (archived)   o.claud.1.148 hand1, stand December 26, 2016 20:41
Annotation Publication/20161024/144 (2017/01/10-14.38.04) (archived)   o.claud.1.148 hand2, original December 26, 2016 20:42
Annotation Publication/20161024/143 (2017/01/10-14.38.04) (archived)   o.claud.1.148 hand2, standard December 26, 2016 20:43
Annotation Publication/20161024/148 (2017/01/10-14.38.05) (archived)   o.claud.1.149 original December 26, 2016 20:44
Annotation Publication/20161024/145 (2017/01/10-14.38.05) (archived)   o.claud.1.149 standard December 26, 2016 20:44
Annotation Publication/20161024/151 (2017/01/10-14.38.03) (archived)   o.claud.1.150 original December 26, 2016 20:45
Annotation Publication/20161024/149 (2017/01/10-14.38.03) (archived)   o.claud.1.150 standard December 26, 2016 20:46
Annotation Publication/20161024/159 (2017/01/10-14.38.03) (archived)   o.claud.1.151 original December 26, 2016 20:46
Annotation Publication/20161024/153 (2017/01/10-14.38.03) (archived)   o.claud.1.151 standard December 26, 2016 20:46
Annotation Publication/20161211/3 (2017/01/12-16.43.46) (archived)   Tässä o.claud.1.162 standardi. Lauseessa 6 aksentti on kirjoitettu ἐρρῶσθε -- pitäisiköhän aksentin kuitenkin olla ensimmäisellä tavulla? December 26, 2016 22:35
Annotation Publication/20161211/4 (2017/01/12-16.43.46) (archived)   O.claud.1.162 originaali. Sama kysymys kuin standardissa. December 26, 2016 22:36
Annotation Publication/20161226/17 (2017/01/12-16.43.48) (archived)   O.claud.1.163 original December 26, 2016 22:53
Annotation Publication/20161226/16 (2017/01/12-16.43.48) (archived)   Tässä varsin lyhyt o.claud.1.163, standardi. December 26, 2016 22:54
Annotation Publication/20161226/19 (2017/01/12-16.43.47) (archived)   O.claud.1.164 original December 27, 2016 20:37
Annotation Publication/20161226/18 (2017/01/12-16.43.47) (archived)   O.claud.1.164 standard December 27, 2016 20:37
Annotation Publication/20161227/85 (2017/01/12-16.43.47) (archived)   O.claud.1.165original; tässä on jonkin verran aukkokohtia, jotka aiheuttavat hieman päänvaivaa. December 31, 2016 18:47
Annotation Publication/20161227/84 (2017/01/12-16.43.47) (archived)   O.claud.1.165 standard December 31, 2016 18:47
Annotation Publication/20161016/13 (2017/01/10-14.38.04) (archived)   o.claud.1.148 hand1, stand January 02, 2017 22:32
Annotation Publication/20161016/16 (2017/01/10-14.38.04) (archived)   o.claud.1.148 hand 1, original January 02, 2017 22:33
Annotation Publication/20161014/20 (2017/01/10-14.38.03) (archived)   o.claud.1.147 originaali January 02, 2017 22:33
Annotation Publication/20161014/16 (2017/01/10-14.38.04) (archived)   Hei! Olen lähetellyt näitä nyt vahingossa väärään osoitteeseen (PerseidsMaster)... uusi yritys, siis. Lähetän näitä tekstejä, jotka vein aiemmin Sematiaan, ja joissa näkyy siellä punainen, avonainen lukko, mistä aiemmin lähetin sähköpostia. Tässä o.claud.1.146 standardi. January 02, 2017 22:36
Annotation Publication/20161014/13 (2017/01/12-16.43.48) (archived)   o.claud.1.146 originaali January 02, 2017 22:36
Annotation Publication/20161014/17 (2017/01/10-14.38.03) (archived)   O.claud.1.147standardi January 02, 2017 22:36
Annotation Publication/20161226/17 (2017/01/12-16.43.48) (archived)   O.claud.1.163orig January 03, 2017 15:53
Annotation Publication/20161014/13 (2017/01/12-16.43.48) (archived)   Ok, kiitos. January 03, 2017 15:55
Annotation Publication/20161024/149 (2017/01/10-14.38.03) (archived)   Juu, kiitos. January 03, 2017 15:56
Annotation Publication/20161024/153 (2017/01/10-14.38.03) (archived)   Ai, tosiaan. Kiitos! Nyt se on korjattu. January 03, 2017 16:01
Annotation Publication/20161024/159 (2017/01/10-14.38.03) (archived)   Okei January 03, 2017 16:01
Annotation Publication/20161014/13 (2017/01/12-16.43.48) (archived)   Kiitos! January 06, 2017 17:44
Annotation Publication/20161227/86 (2017/01/12-16.43.47) (archived)   O.claud.1.166stand January 06, 2017 18:00
Annotation Publication/20161227/87 (2017/01/12-16.43.47) (archived)   o.claud.1.166.orig. January 06, 2017 18:00
Annotation Publication/20161227/88 (2017/01/12-16.43.46) (archived)   o.claud.1.167stand. January 06, 2017 18:37
Annotation Publication/20161227/89 (2017/01/12-16.43.46) (archived)   o.claud.1.167orig. January 06, 2017 18:38
Annotation Publication/20161227/90 (2017/01/12-16.43.46) (archived)   o.claud.1.168 stand. Lauseessa 4, pitäisikö ἔλθῃς olla ennemmin ADV vai OBJ, vai jotain ihan muuta? January 06, 2017 18:53
Annotation Publication/20161227/91 (2017/01/12-16.43.47) (archived)   o.claud.1.168orig. Sama kysymys kuin standardissa. January 06, 2017 18:53
Annotation Publication/20161231/40 (2017/02/25-12.02.01) (archived)   O.claud.1.170 stand. Lauseessa 5, en ole varma mitä pitäisi merkitä βύνι -sanan lemmaksi ja suvuksi. Samassa lauseessa, tulisiko ἐπιθῶ tulkita ennemmin indikatiiviksi vai konjunktiiviksi? January 07, 2017 18:28
Annotation Publication/20161231/41 (2017/02/25-12.02.01) (archived)   o.claud.1.170orig. Kysyisin samaa kuin standardissa. January 07, 2017 18:28
Annotation Publication/20161211/1 (2017/01/12-16.43.46) (archived)   Kiitos; nyt on englanti poistettu! January 10, 2017 14:03
Annotation Publication/20161211/2 (2017/01/12-16.43.46) (archived)   Ok January 10, 2017 14:03
Annotation Publication/20161211/3 (2017/01/12-16.43.46) (archived)   Ai, olin vain huolimaton. Luultavasti ajattelin indikatiivin sopivan huonosti, koska kirjoittajan mielestä verbin sanoma ei pidä paikkaansa. Jätän errôsthe:n aksentin noin kuin se on editoitu ja muodon avoimeksi, jos se on mielestäsi käypä ratkaisu; en näet tullut ajatelleeksi inf.-mahdollisuutta. January 10, 2017 14:22
Annotation Publication/20161211/4 (2017/01/12-16.43.46) (archived)   Ok, kiitos! January 10, 2017 14:23
Annotation Publication/20161226/19 (2017/01/12-16.43.47) (archived)   Kiitos; tässä January 10, 2017 14:26
Annotation Publication/20161231/40 (2017/02/25-12.02.01) (archived)   Sanakohtaiset kommentit näkyvät kyllä, kiitos! Nyt pitäisi olla kaiken kunnossa. January 12, 2017 16:26
Annotation Publication/20161231/41 (2017/02/25-12.02.01) (archived)   Ok. January 12, 2017 16:26
Annotation Publication/20161231/38 (2017/02/25-12.02.01) (archived)   O.claud.1.169stand. En oikein saa tästä selkoa. January 12, 2017 17:04
Annotation Publication/20161231/39 (2017/02/25-12.02.01) (archived)   O.claud.1.169orig. Samat pulmat kuin standardissa. January 12, 2017 17:04
Annotation Publication/20161231/42 (2017/02/25-12.02.01) (archived)   O.claud.1.171stand January 12, 2017 17:23
Annotation Publication/20161231/43 (2017/02/25-12.02.01) (archived)   O.claud.1.171orig January 12, 2017 17:23
Annotation Publication/201717/14 (2017/02/25-12.02.00) (archived)   O.claud.1.172stand. Kuinka välimerkit (jotka ostakonissa) tulisi tässä annotoida? January 12, 2017 17:34
Annotation Publication/201717/15 (2017/02/25-12.02.00) (archived)   O.claud.1.172orig. Tässäkin kysyisin välimerkeistä. January 12, 2017 17:35
Annotation Publication/201717/16 (2017/02/25-12.02.00) (archived)   O.claud.1.173stand. Lause 3: sopiiko κιβάρια (mon.ntr.) laittaa lemmaksi? Löysin sanan ainoastaan latinankielisistä sanakirjoista (cibaria). January 13, 2017 20:15
Annotation Publication/201717/17 (2017/02/25-12.02.00) (archived)   O.claud.1.173orig. Sama kysymys kuin standardissa. January 13, 2017 20:15
Annotation Publication/20161231/39 (2017/02/25-12.02.01) (archived)   Ok. January 26, 2017 21:52
Annotation Publication/20161231/38 (2017/02/25-12.02.01) (archived)   Ok! January 26, 2017 21:53
Annotation Publication/20161231/42 (2017/02/25-12.02.01) (archived)   Tosiaan, enpä huomannut. January 26, 2017 21:59
Annotation Publication/201717/14 (2017/02/25-12.02.00) (archived)   Kiitos. Jätin sellaiset ostrakonissa olevat pisteet, jotka osuvat virkkeen loppuun, AuxK:lla merkityiksi -- pitäisikö nämäkin ennemmin annotoida AuxG? January 26, 2017 22:06
Annotation Publication/201717/15 (2017/02/25-12.02.00) (archived)   Sama kuin standardissa January 26, 2017 22:06
Annotation Publication/201717/16 (2017/02/25-12.02.00) (archived)   Juu; tässäkin jätin vielä virkkeen loppuun osuvat pisteet merkityiksi AuxK. Pitäisikö ne muuttaa AuxG:ksi? January 26, 2017 22:27
Annotation Publication/201717/17 (2017/02/25-12.02.00) (archived)   Ja sama kysymys kuin standardissa January 26, 2017 22:28
Annotation Publication/201717/19 (2017/02/25-12.02.00) (archived)   O.claud.1.174stand. Hei! Tässä on jonkin verran epäselviä kohtia. Kuinkahan paljon elliptisiä lauseita tulisi täydentää? Seuraavista ainakin olen epävarma: virke 2: pitäisi ἐπεὶ:n liittyä ennemmin verbiin ἔγραψα vaiko πέμψατέ? Ja onko πέμψατέ tässä tulkittava infinitiiviksi vai imperatiiviksi? Virke 3: tämän tulkinnasta en ole varma; päänvaivaa tuo etenkin tämä "ek tôn mikrôn to hêmisu labontes eis rakadion". Virke 4: pitäisikö sanan χαλκοῦ lemma olla ohjelman tarjoama χαλκοῦς, vaiko χαλκός? Virke 5: ποτέ adv. vai AuxY? Virke 9: Kuinka päiväys on tapana annotoida? January 27, 2017 23:18
Annotation Publication/201717/18 (2017/02/25-12.01.59) (archived)   O.claud.1.174orig. Samat kysymykset kuin standardissa, ja lisäksi: Virke 6: kuinka ylimääräinen ἐν τῶι tulee merkitä? January 27, 2017 23:19
Annotation Publication/2017113/30 (2017/02/25-12.01.59) (archived)   O.claud.1.175stand. Lause 1: kumpiko näistä on subjekti ja kumpi predikaatti, ἀνάγκη vai ἐπεῖναι? Ja onko jälkimmäisen lemma ennemmin ἔπειμι (jolloin σκοπελάριν SUB) vai ἐφίημι (jolloin σκοπελάριν OBJ)? Lause 3: laitoin δύο:n aiemmin ἐκ-sanasta riippuvaiseksi attribuutiksi, ja ἔπεμψας:n δύο:n ATR:ksi, mutta päädyin kuitenkin tähän ratkaisuun; onko sinulle jokin parempi ehdotus? February 07, 2017 14:34
Annotation Publication/2017113/31 (2017/02/25-12.01.59) (archived)   O.claud.1.175orig. Samat kysymykset kuin standardissa; lisäksi: lause 1: tulisiko lemmaksi laittaa ἐSUῖναι vai ἔπειμι / ἐφίημι? February 07, 2017 14:35
Annotation Publication/201717/19 (2017/02/25-12.02.00) (archived)   Kiitos! Luulen, että sain nyt kaiken korjattua. February 13, 2017 20:20
Annotation Publication/201717/18 (2017/02/25-12.01.59) (archived)   Kiitos! Persoonaa ei saa merkittyä sellaisiin pronomineihin, jotka luo itse, kuten epsilonin kanssa kirjoitettu ὑμεῖν on luotava. Tällaisia tapapauksia on ollut joissakin aiemmissakin teksteissä. Valitettavasti en ole älynnyt kysyä, miksi persoona puuttuu valikosta. February 13, 2017 20:28
Annotation Publication/2017113/30 (2017/02/25-12.01.59) (archived)   Kiitos; tässä! February 13, 2017 20:41
Annotation Publication/2017113/31 (2017/02/25-12.01.59) (archived)   Kiitos. February 13, 2017 20:46
Annotation Publication/20161122/35 (2017/02/25-12.01.59) (archived)   Kiitos! Jäiköhän jotain vielä huomaamatta? February 13, 2017 21:14
Annotation Publication/20161122/36 (2017/02/25-12.01.59) (archived)   Okei. Tarkistathan vielä huolella tämänkin, kiitos -- 2. lause on niin epäselvä, ja siinä on varaa niin monenlaisille tulkinnoille. February 13, 2017 21:16
Annotation Publication/2017113/33 (2017/04/02-17.05.38) (archived)   O.claud. 1.176orig. Tässä näyttää painetun edition mukaan kirjuri korjanneen 3. virkkeessä χαλκου-sanan muotoon χελκου. Voinko kirjata tämän muodon xml:ään? February 20, 2017 19:54
Annotation Publication/2017113/32 (2017/04/02-17.05.38) (archived)   O.claud.1.176stand. February 20, 2017 19:54
Annotation Publication/2017115/43 (2017/04/02-17.05.38) (archived)   O.claud.1.177stand. February 20, 2017 20:03
Annotation Publication/2017115/44 (2017/04/02-17.05.37) (archived)   O.claud.1.177orig. February 20, 2017 20:04
Annotation Publication/2017115/45 (2017/04/02-17.05.37) (archived)   O.claud.1.178stand. February 20, 2017 20:57
Annotation Publication/2017115/46 (2017/04/02-17.05.37) (archived)   O.claud.1.178orig. February 20, 2017 20:57
Annotation Publication/2017113/32 (2017/04/02-17.05.38) (archived)   Selvä. Hyvä tietää nimiasia, kiitos. February 25, 2017 11:58
Annotation Publication/2017113/33 (2017/04/02-17.05.38) (archived)   Juu February 25, 2017 11:58
Annotation Publication/2017115/43 (2017/04/02-17.05.38) (archived)   Ok. February 25, 2017 12:00
Annotation Publication/2017115/44 (2017/04/02-17.05.37) (archived)   Ok. February 25, 2017 12:00
Annotation Publication/2017115/45 (2017/04/02-17.05.37) (archived)   Ok. February 25, 2017 12:01
Annotation Publication/2017115/46 (2017/04/02-17.05.37) (archived)   Ok. February 25, 2017 12:01
Annotation Publication/2017220/54 (2017/04/02-17.05.37) (archived)   Upz.1.64stand. Hei! Virkkeessä 2 on ongelmallinen kohta; standardissa on korjattu adj. ἐρρωμένωι; originaalissa näyttäisi kuitenkin olevan adverbimuoto ἐρρωμενως. Virke 4: kuinka περὶ ὧν ἂν βούληται tulisi annotoida? Virke 5: Painetuissa editioissa on nominatiivimuoto παραγενηθεὶς (kuten originaalissa, tosin jostakin syystä ilman aksenttia), mutta standardissa on dat. παραγενηθέντι. Voinko korjata nom.-muodon XML:ään? Virke 9: Predikaatti puuttuu, mutta tekstissä on aukko; lisäänkö siis elliptisen predikaatin vai en? Tulisiko muuten substantivoidut adjektiivit, kuten τοῦ ἀσύλου virkkeessä 5, merkitä adjektiiveiksi vai substantiiveiksi? March 16, 2017 11:05
Annotation Publication/2017220/55 (2017/04/02-17.05.37) (archived)   Upz.1.64orig. Samoja asioita kuin standardissa. March 16, 2017 11:05
Annotation Publication/2017220/54 (2017/04/02-17.05.37) (archived)   Ai, en huomannut apparaatin merkintää παραγενηθέντι / παραγενηθεις -sanasta. Olisiko sana dat.-muodossa siis ATR σοι:lle? Pelkäänpä, että lause on minusta hieman omituinen, oli siinä sitten tarkoitus olla nom. tai dat. Kummanko sinä arvelet sopivan paremmin kirjoittajan ajatukseen? March 18, 2017 21:43
Annotation Publication/2017220/55 (2017/04/02-17.05.37) (archived)   Tässä korjauksin. March 18, 2017 21:45
Annotation Publication/2017220/57 (2017/04/02-17.05.37) (archived)   Upz.1.66orig. Voinko poistaa lausessa 2 ylimääräisen καὶ:n? March 22, 2017 20:25
Annotation Publication/2017220/56 (2017/04/02-17.05.37) (archived)   Upz.1.66stand. March 22, 2017 20:26
Annotation Publication/2017220/56 (2017/04/02-17.05.37) (archived)   Noin. Poistanko kuukauden aksentin myös XML:sta, vai ainoastaan lemmasta? March 26, 2017 18:58
Annotation Publication/2017220/57 (2017/04/02-17.05.37) (archived)   Poistanko kuukauden aksentin myös XML:sta, vai ainoastaan lemmasta? March 26, 2017 18:58
Annotation Publication/2017220/58 (2017/04/02-17.05.36) (archived)   UPZ.1.67stand. Virkkeissä 2 ja 4 en ole varma, kuinka hinta tulisi merkitä. Miten toimin virkkeen 6 kanssa? March 26, 2017 19:18
Annotation Publication/2017220/59 (2017/04/02-17.05.37) (archived)   UPZ.1.67orig. Samat kysymykset kuin standardissa, eli kuinka hinta tulisi merkitä virkkeissä 2 ja 4, ja mitä teen virkkeen 6 kanssa? March 26, 2017 19:19
Annotation Publication/2017220/56 (2017/04/02-17.05.37) (archived)   Kiitos! Tässä. March 28, 2017 17:36
Annotation Publication/2017220/57 (2017/04/02-17.05.37) (archived)   Ok. March 28, 2017 17:36
Annotation Publication/2017220/58 (2017/04/02-17.05.36) (archived)   Ok, kiitos. March 28, 2017 17:48
Annotation Publication/2017220/59 (2017/04/02-17.05.37) (archived)   Ok, kiitoksia. March 28, 2017 17:49
Annotation Publication/2017326/8 (2017/05/04-17.40.04) (archived)   upz.1.59 hand3 orig. April 02, 2017 17:12
Annotation Publication/2017326/7 (2017/05/04-17.40.04) (archived)   upz.1.59_hand3_stand April 02, 2017 17:13
Annotation Publication/2017326/5 (2017/05/04-17.40.03) (archived)   upz.1.59_hand2_stand. April 02, 2017 17:14
Annotation Publication/2017326/6 (2017/05/04-17.40.04) (archived)   upz.1.59_hand2_orig. April 02, 2017 17:14
Annotation Publication/2017326/3 (2017/07/05-13.36.21) (archived)   Hei! Tässä upz1.59 hand 1 stand. On ollut vähän taukoa siitä kuin olen viimeksi ehtinyt kunnolla paneutua tähän. 3. virkkeessä olen epävarma monesta kohdasta; se on todella pitkä. May 03, 2017 20:52
Annotation Publication/2017326/4 (2017/07/05-13.36.21) (archived)   Upz.1.59_hand1_orig. May 03, 2017 20:53
Annotation Publication/2017326/10 (2017/07/05-13.36.21) (archived)   upz.1.60orig. May 15, 2017 20:29
Annotation Publication/2017326/9 (2017/07/05-13.36.20) (archived)   Hei! Tässä vielä upz.1.60stand. May 15, 2017 20:40
Annotation Publication/2017326/10 (2017/07/05-13.36.21) (archived)   Upz. 1.60 orig. May 15, 2017 20:41
Annotation Publication/2017326/4 (2017/07/05-13.36.21) (archived)   Kiitos! Olen nyt mielestäni tehnyt kaikki muutokset (2. lauseessa olin ollut huolimaton...). Minulla on hieman hankaluuksia välillä hahmottaa adverbiaalien ja OBJ:n komplementtifunktion eroa. (Esim. kommentit 5.11:a ja 5.13:a; tosin kalos poieseis on ollut monesti aiemminkin, joten siinä olin taas huolimaton...) June 18, 2017 16:42
Annotation Publication/2017326/3 (2017/07/05-13.36.21) (archived)   Tässä myös standardi korjauksin! June 18, 2017 16:43
Annotation Publication/2017326/10 (2017/07/05-13.36.21) (archived)   Kiitos! Nyt uskoisin kaiken olevan kunnossa. June 30, 2017 17:19
Annotation Publication/2017326/9 (2017/07/05-13.36.20) (archived)   Kiitos! Tässä korjauksin. June 30, 2017 17:20
Annotation Publication/201864/2 (editing)   P.Cair.Masp.1.67008 stand. Tässä on aika paljon päänvaivaa tuottavia asioita; erityisesti seuraavat: virkkeessä 1, kuinka tulisi merkitä τὸ β (minkä tulkitsen tarkoittavan "toista kertaa", kuten ainak. p.oslo 3.78:n käännöksessä papyri.info:ssa, rivi 3)?; ja viimeisen virkkeen tulkinta ja annotointi. Olen myös epävarma aloitusformulan tulkinnasta; se esiintyy muissakin arkiston papyruksissa, mutten ole löytänyt sille käännöstä. June 04, 2018 13:05
Annotation Publication/201864/37 (2018/09/20-15.05.01) (archived)   P.Cair.Masp.1.67061 stand. Viimeiseen virkkeeseen täydennetty Λαυτων -sana (erisnimi?) jää minulle hämäräksi. June 06, 2018 06:49
Annotation Publication/201864/38 (2018/09/20-15.05.00) (archived)   P.Cair.Masp.1.67061 orig. June 06, 2018 06:49
Annotation Publication/201865/6 (2018/09/20-15.05.01) (archived)   P.Cair.Masp.1.67067 stand. 1. virkkeessä en ole varma, miten καὶ tulisi tulkita, ja 2. virkkeestä olen epävarma, en ihan ymmärrä mitä siinä sanotaan. June 06, 2018 08:40
Annotation Publication/201865/5 (2018/09/20-15.05.01) (archived)   P.Cair.Masp.1.67067 orig. Samat vaikeudet kuin standardissa, eli καὶ virkkeessä 1 ja virkkeen 2 tulkinta. June 06, 2018 08:41
Annotation Publication/201864/2 (editing)   Hei! Tein vielä pari muutosta kohdissa, joista olen epävarma: 4. virkkeessä vaihdoin πᾶσι > ATR ja ἀδικουμένοις > OBJ, kun aiemmin oli toisin päin; ja 5. virkkeessä ἔχον > OBJ, jolle πρᾶγμα > SUB, kun aiemmin olin merkinnyt OBJ:ksi πρᾶγμα:n ja sille ATR:ksi ἔχον:n. En ole ihan varma ymmärränkö virkkeen oikein. June 06, 2018 09:57
Annotation Publication/201864/1 (editing)   P.Cair.Masp.1.67008 orig. Samoja ongelmia kuin standardissa. Viimeinen virke varsinkin tuottaa päänvaivaa. June 06, 2018 10:14
Annotation Publication/201864/37 (2018/09/20-15.05.01) (archived)   Siirsin vielä _CO:t pois AuxP:n jäljestä niiden "lapsiin", kuten ohjeissa neuvotaan, ja minkä olin unohtanut. June 08, 2018 19:21
Annotation Publication/201864/38 (2018/09/20-15.05.00) (archived)   Siirsin vielä _CO:t pois AuxP:n jäljestä niiden "lapsiin", kuten ohjeissa neuvotaan, ja minkä olin unohtanut. June 08, 2018 19:21
Annotation Publication/201866/17 (editing)   P.Cair.Masp.1.67066 stand. Hei! Tässä on joitakin kohtia, joissa saatoin pudota kärryiltä. 6. virkkeessä en ole varma, pitäisikö παράλογον merkitä ADV:ksi vai OBJ:ksi (ja jos OBJ, niin mask. v. neuri?). June 12, 2018 18:30
Annotation Publication/201866/18 (editing)   P.Cair.Masp.1.67066 orig. Kuten standardissa, παράλογον virkkeessä 6 tuottaa päänvaivaa. June 12, 2018 18:31
Annotation Publication/2018610/3 (editing)   P.Cair.Masp.1.67040 orig. June 13, 2018 19:40
Annotation Publication/2018610/4 (editing)   P.Cair.Masp.1.67040 stand. June 13, 2018 19:41
Annotation Publication/2018610/2 (2018/09/20-15.01.23) (archived)   P.Cair.Masp.1.67037 stand. June 14, 2018 04:12
Annotation Publication/2018610/1 (2018/09/20-15.01.23) (archived)   P.Cair.Masp.1.67037 orig. June 14, 2018 04:12
Annotation Publication/2018610/2 (2018/09/20-15.01.23) (archived)   Muutin vielä 3. virkkeessä τοῦ δημοσίου (sc. λόγου, jos ymmärsin oikein - vrt. esim. 67034 ja 67035) neutrista maskuliiniksi. June 14, 2018 04:39
Annotation Publication/2018610/1 (2018/09/20-15.01.23) (archived)   Sama muutos 3. virkkeessä kuin standardissa. June 14, 2018 04:40
Annotation Publication/2018610/2 (2018/09/20-15.01.23) (archived)   Ja pilkutus ekassa virkkeessä on vähän hankala. June 14, 2018 06:15
Annotation Publication/2018610/1 (2018/09/20-15.01.23) (archived)   - June 14, 2018 06:15
Annotation Publication/2018610/2 (2018/09/20-15.01.23) (archived)   - June 14, 2018 06:28
Annotation Publication/2018610/1 (2018/09/20-15.01.23) (archived)   - June 14, 2018 06:28
Annotation Publication/2018610/4 (editing)   - June 16, 2018 06:28
Annotation Publication/2018610/3 (editing)   - June 16, 2018 06:28
Annotation Publication/201863/4 (editing)   P.cair.masp.1.67033 stand. En oikein tiedä, kuinka 1. virkkeen pilkutus tulisi merkitä. June 16, 2018 06:50
Annotation Publication/201863/5 (editing)   P.cair.masp.1.67033 orig. Tässäkin olen epävarma 1. virkkeen pilkutuksen tulkinnasta. June 16, 2018 06:51
Annotation Publication/201863/4 (editing)   Tein vielä muutoksia. Tämä on aika hankala teksti. Löysin kuitenkin englanninnoksen, jota käytin tulkinnassa (Select Papyri II, s. 486–489, no. 385). June 16, 2018 07:55
Annotation Publication/201863/5 (editing)   Tähänkin tein vielä muutoksia, mutta olen yhä epävarma joistakin kohdista. June 16, 2018 07:56
Annotation Publication/201868/3 (editing)   P.cair.masp.1.67034 stand. Tässä ediittori onkin katsonut στοιχεῖ μοι :n aloittavan uuden virkkeen, toisin kuin esim. 67033:ssa ja 67040:ssa (vrt. myös 67035, jossa στοιχεῖ μοι :n sijaan πεποίημαι). Kumpiko ratkaisu on mielestäsi parempi? Maspero katkaisee virkkeen στοιχεῖ μοι :n edellä (ano teleia -pisteellä) (muttei πεποίημαι:n edellä 67035:ssa), Loeb-editoija (Select Papyri II, s. 488) ei. June 16, 2018 08:17
Annotation Publication/201868/2 (editing)   P.Cair.Masp.1.67034 orig. Tässä sama ongelma kuin originaalissa. June 16, 2018 08:18
Annotation Publication/201868/5 (editing)   P.cair.masp.1.67035 stand. Tässäkin viimeisen virkkeen jako on pulmallinen -- kommentoin aihetta 67034:n kohdalla. Lisäksi näissä kuiteissa on jaetun attribuutin ongelma: mm. ilmaisu εὔσταθμα ἁπλᾶ koskee varmaankin sekä nomismationeja että kerationeja. Mietin kuitenkin, voisiko εὔσταθμα ἁπλᾶ :n kenties tulita ADV:na? June 16, 2018 08:40
Annotation Publication/201868/6 (editing)   P.cair.masp.1.67035 orig. Samat kysymykset kuin standardissa. June 16, 2018 08:41
Annotation Publication/201865/6 (2018/09/20-15.05.01) (archived)   Kiitos! Ahaa, tämä selkeyttääkin 2. virkkeen tulkintaa. Tässä korjattu versio. June 18, 2018 11:07
Annotation Publication/201865/5 (2018/09/20-15.05.01) (archived)   Tässä korjauksin. June 18, 2018 11:07
Annotation Publication/2018610/4 (editing)   P.cair.masp.1.67040 stand. Ekassa virkkeessä olen epävarma, miten pilkutus tulisi merkitä, ja pitäisikö παρʼ olla alisteinen δεδώκασι :lle vai δοθέντων :lle. Päädyin jälkimmäiseen. June 18, 2018 13:35
Annotation Publication/2018610/3 (editing)   P.cair.masp.1.67040 orig. Sama pulma kuin standardissa. June 18, 2018 13:35
Annotation Publication/201865/6 (2018/09/20-15.05.01) (archived)   Totta. Okei, nyt on sekin muutettu. June 19, 2018 08:57
Annotation Publication/201865/5 (2018/09/20-15.05.01) (archived)   Ok. June 19, 2018 08:58
Annotation Publication/201865/5 (2018/09/20-15.05.01) (archived)   Juu, ei hätää! Tässä korjattu versio. June 19, 2018 13:37
Annotation Publication/201864/37 (2018/09/20-15.05.01) (archived)   Kiitos! Nyt se on muutettu. June 19, 2018 13:44
Annotation Publication/201864/38 (2018/09/20-15.05.00) (archived)   Tässä korjattu versio. June 19, 2018 13:44
Annotation Publication/2018620/5 (2018/09/20-15.01.23) (archived)   P.mich.13.668 stand, hand 1. Hei! Jäin empimään, miten Παυλος pitäisi merkitä. Käytin SBJ:ta, mutta aiemmin annotoimissani teksteissä olen käyttänyt vastaavassa rakenteessa ExD:ta (nämä täytyy tietysti yhtenäistää). Kumpiko (vai jokin toinen vaihtoehto?) on parempi? June 21, 2018 07:33
Annotation Publication/2018620/6 (2018/09/20-15.01.22) (archived)   P.mich.13.668 orig, hand 1. Sama kysymys kuin standardissa. June 21, 2018 07:33
Annotation Publication/2018620/7 (2018/09/20-15.01.22) (archived)   P.mich.13.668 stand, hand 3. Tässä sama kysymys kuin hand 2:ssa, mutta Apollosta koskien. June 21, 2018 07:44
Annotation Publication/2018620/8 (2018/09/20-15.01.22) (archived)   P.mich.13.668 orig, hand 3. Sama kysymys kuin standardissa ja hand 2:ssa. June 21, 2018 07:45
Annotation Publication/2018620/9 (2018/09/20-15.01.22) (archived)   P.mich.13.668 stand, hand 4. En oikein tiedä, onko APOS hyvä ratkaisu vai olisiko jokin parempi. Pitäisikö νομικοῦ merkitä tässä positiiviksi (vai substantiiviksi)? June 21, 2018 07:58
Annotation Publication/2018620/10 (2018/09/20-15.01.22) (archived)   P.mich.668 orig, hand 4. Samat kysymykset kuin standardissa. June 21, 2018 07:58
Annotation Publication/2018620/11 (2018/09/20-15.05.00) (archived)   P.mich.13.668 stand, hand 5. June 21, 2018 08:08
Annotation Publication/2018620/12 (2018/09/20-15.05.00) (archived)   P.mich.13.668 orig, hand 5. Luotin tässä ediittoriin, että αποA on avattu oikein. Predikaatista sama kysymys kuin standardissa. June 21, 2018 08:12
Annotation Publication/201865/5 (2018/09/20-15.05.01) (archived)   Hei! Merkitsin vielä SU:n verbiksi; en ole varma, oliko tämä tarkoitus. En muista, onko vastaavaa tapausta tullut aiemmin vastaan. June 21, 2018 12:33
Annotation Publication/2018621/5 (2018/09/20-15.05.00) (archived)   P.mich.13.669 stand, hand 3. Tässä käytin nyt ExD:ta; onkohan se hyvä ratkaisu vai ei? June 21, 2018 13:08
Annotation Publication/2018621/6 (2018/09/20-15.04.59) (archived)   P.mich.13.669 stand, hand 3. ExD:sta en ole varma. June 21, 2018 13:09
Annotation Publication/2018621/7 (2018/09/20-15.04.59) (archived)   P. Mich. 13.669 stand, hand 4. Tässäkin päädyin ExD-ratkaisuun, en ole varma siitä. Ediittori on näköjään eri mieltä Ἀπόλλως / Ἀπολλῶς -nimen aksentuaatiosta kuin mikä Trismegistokseen on kirjattu. Pitäisikö lemmaksi laittaa jälkimmäinen, vaikka Trismegistoksessa on akuutti toisella tavulla, vai ehdottaa muutosta Papyri.infoon? June 21, 2018 13:18
Annotation Publication/2018621/8 (2018/09/20-15.04.59) (archived)   P. Mich. 13.669 orig, hand 4. Samat pulmat kuin standardissa. June 21, 2018 13:18
Annotation Publication/2018621/17 (committed)   P.mich.13.670 hand 3, stand . En ole varma, pitäisikö θεμένου merkitä merkitä ennemmin OBJ:ksi (komplementtina), vai ADV:ksi. June 22, 2018 07:21
Annotation Publication/2018621/18 (committed)   P.mich.13.670 hand 3, orig. En ole varma, pitäisikö θεμένου merkitä merkitä ennemmin OBJ:ksi (komplementtina), vai ADV:ksi. June 22, 2018 07:21
Annotation Publication/2018623/15 (2018/09/20-15.01.20) (archived)   P.Mich.13.663 hand 8, stand. Hei! En ole varma, tulkitsenko oikein, että συν θεω on ATR ταβελλιωνος -sanalle. June 25, 2018 07:10
Annotation Publication/2018623/16 (2018/09/20-15.01.20) (archived)   P.Mich. 13.663 hand 8, orig. Pitäisikö SU ottaa tässä prepositioksi? June 25, 2018 07:11
Annotation Publication/2018623/5 (2018/09/22-12.20.26) (archived)   P.Mich.13.663 hand 4, stand. Tein GG:sta sunbstantiivin ja SBJ:n -- onko tämä ok? En kuitenkaan tiedä, pitäisikö se nyt kiinnittää toiseen predikaattiin vai niiden COORD:iin. Lisäksi tulkitsin παρὰ τῆς θεμένης :n komplementtina ἀκούσας :lle, joten merkitsin sen OBJ, en ADV, mutten ole varma ratkaisusta. June 25, 2018 11:26
Annotation Publication/2018623/6 (2018/09/22-12.20.27) (archived)   Samoja asioita kuin standardissa. Lisäksi en ole varma, onko SU käypä COORD tässä, koska ei ole varmaa, oliko papyruksessa δὲ. (Vastaavassa kohdassa hand 3 kirjoittaa: μαρτυρ]ῶ̣ καὶ τῇ καταβολῇ, hand 5: μαρτυρῶ \δὲ/ [καὶ τῇ καταβολῃ, hand 6: μαρτυρο δὲ [καὶ τῇ καταβολῇ, ja hand 7: μαρτυρῶ τὴ καὶ τῇ παρα[λήμψει.) June 25, 2018 11:34
Annotation Publication/2018623/3 (2018/09/20-15.01.21) (archived)   P.mich.13.663 hand 3 stand. Tässä on samoja pulmia kuin hand 4:ssa. Tässä laitoin pilkun COORD:ksi, koska δὲ puuttuu. Vai olisiko καὶ sittenkin parempi COORD:ksi? June 25, 2018 11:45
Annotation Publication/2018623/4 (2018/09/20-15.01.21) (archived)   P.mich.13.663 hand 3 orig. Samoja asioita kuin standardissa ja hand 4:ssa. June 25, 2018 11:45
Annotation Publication/2018621/4 (2018/09/20-15.01.19) (archived)   P.Mich.13.669 hand 2 orig. Pitäisikö Βίκτωρ kiinnittää ennemmin COORD:iin? June 25, 2018 14:10
Annotation Publication/2018621/3 (2018/09/20-15.01.19) (archived)   P.Mich.13.669 hand 2 stand. Pitäisikö Βίκτωρ kiinnittää ennemmin COORD:iin? June 25, 2018 14:10
Annotation Publication/2018623/9 (2018/09/20-15.01.21) (archived)   P.mich.13.663 hand 5, stand. June 26, 2018 14:14
Annotation Publication/2018623/10 (2018/09/20-15.01.21) (archived)   P.mich.13.663 hand 5, orig. June 26, 2018 14:14
Annotation Publication/2018623/1 (2018/09/20-15.01.22) (archived)   P.Mich.13.663 hand 2, stand. Tässäkin olen epävarma mm. siitä, merkitä Maria SBJ:ksi vai ExD:ksi, ja mihin kiinnittää hänet. Originaalin lopussa näyttää lisäksi olevan jostain syystä SU, jota standardissa ei ole. June 27, 2018 07:30
Annotation Publication/2018623/2 (2018/09/20-15.01.21) (archived)   P.Mich.13.663 hand 2, orig. Tässäkin olen epävarma mm. siitä, merkitäkö Maria SBJ:ksi vai ExD:ksi, ja mihin kiinnittää hänet. Originaalin lopussa näyttää lisäksi olevan jostain syystä SU, jota standardissa ei ole. June 27, 2018 07:31
Annotation Publication/2018623/13 (2018/09/20-15.01.20) (archived)   P.mich.13.663 hand 7 stand. June 27, 2018 07:41
Annotation Publication/2018623/14 (2018/09/20-15.01.20) (archived)   P.mich.13.663 hand 7, orig. Voitaneen olettaa, että ediittori on avannut αναγΑ:n oikein? June 27, 2018 07:42
Annotation Publication/2018623/11 (2018/09/20-15.01.20) (archived)   P.mich.13.663 hand 6, stand. June 27, 2018 07:46
Annotation Publication/2018623/12 (2018/09/20-15.01.20) (archived)   P.mich.13.663 hand 6, orig. June 27, 2018 07:46
Annotation Publication/2018621/9 (2018/09/20-15.04.59) (archived)   P.mich.13.669 hand 5, stand. Tässä ei olekaan paljoa. Pitäisikö "A/aureliokseen" vaihtaa iso alkukirjain (myös papyri.infoon)? En ole varma, onko liikaa spekulointia merkitä G substantiiviksi ja Aurel[ios] sille määreeksi. June 27, 2018 07:58
Annotation Publication/2018621/10 (2018/09/20-15.04.59) (archived)   P.mich.13.669 hand 5, orig. Sama kysymys kuin standardissa. June 27, 2018 07:58
Annotation Publication/2018620/3 (2018/10/26-13.48.19) (archived)   P.Mich.13.668, hand 1, stand. Tämä on tosi hankala teksti. En ole varma, mikä olisi paras ratkaisu 3. virkkeessä. Pitäisikö 2. virkkeessä εGGθίου merkitä substantiiviksi, ja onko PNOM ok ratkaisu? 3. virkkeessä mainittua kuukauden nimeä en löytänyt Logeionista enkä TLG:stä: merkitsin lemmaksi Ἐπείφ, ja suvun maskuliiniksi, sillä perusteella että tuo muoto taitaa esiintyä editioissa ja koska muiden kuukausien nimet taitavat olla maskuliineja; mutta siitä en siis ole varma. June 29, 2018 07:11
Annotation Publication/2018620/4 (2018/10/26-13.48.19) (archived)   P.Mich.13.668, hand 1, orig. Tässä samoja pulmia kuin standardissa. Voidaankohan olettaa, että ἐπληρώSUην on aor. pass. (kuten standardissa), vai pitäisikö aikamuoto ja genus jättää auki? June 29, 2018 07:22
Annotation Publication/2018620/3 (2018/10/26-13.48.19) (archived)   Ai niin: 2. virkkeessä päädyin tuohon vähän erikoiseen ratkaisuun predikaattien suhteen. En tiedä, onko se sallittu (voiko COORD riippua COORD:sta?), vai pitäisikö vain kiinnittää kaikki predikaatit samaan και:hin. Vähän samanlainen tilanne on 669:ssa, hand 1, virke 2. Onglemana on sitten kuitenkin edelleen, mihin ne komplementit, jotka ovat alisteisia kahdelle predikaatille, pitäisi kiinnittää. June 29, 2018 07:39
Annotation Publication/2018620/4 (2018/10/26-13.48.19) (archived)   - June 29, 2018 07:40
Annotation Publication/2018610/1 (2018/09/20-15.01.23) (archived)   - June 30, 2018 07:49
Annotation Publication/2018610/2 (2018/09/20-15.01.23) (archived)   - June 30, 2018 07:49
Annotation Publication/201868/6 (editing)   - June 30, 2018 07:54
Annotation Publication/201863/5 (editing)   - June 30, 2018 07:56
Annotation Publication/201868/2 (editing)   - June 30, 2018 08:00
Annotation Publication/2018610/3 (editing)   - June 30, 2018 08:04
Annotation Publication/201864/1 (editing)   - June 30, 2018 08:13
Annotation Publication/201866/18 (editing)   - June 30, 2018 08:18
Annotation Publication/2018620/10 (2018/09/20-15.01.22) (archived)   Tosiaan, kiitos! Tässä korjattu versio. July 03, 2018 13:06
Annotation Publication/2018620/9 (2018/09/20-15.01.22) (archived)   Kiitos! Tässä korjattu versio. July 03, 2018 13:07
Annotation Publication/2018623/16 (2018/09/20-15.01.20) (archived)   Hei! Huomasin juuri äsken, että tässähän näyttää olevan ylimääräinen SU alussa, kun vertaa standardiin. Pitäisikö yksi SU ottaa pois? July 03, 2018 17:50
Annotation Publication/2018623/15 (2018/09/20-15.01.20) (archived)   - July 03, 2018 17:50
Annotation Publication/2018615/12 (2019/07/28-15.44.12) (archived)   P. Cair. Masp. 1.67049 stand. Tässä on etenkin virke 3 vähän haastava. July 04, 2018 20:03
Annotation Publication/2018615/13 (2019/07/28-15.44.09) (archived)   P. Cair. Masp. 1.67049 orig. Kuten standardissa, virke 3:sta olen hyvin epävarma. July 04, 2018 20:03
Annotation Publication/2018615/12 (2019/07/28-15.44.12) (archived)   Apolloksesta aksentti poistettu. July 05, 2018 18:50
Annotation Publication/2018615/13 (2019/07/28-15.44.09) (archived)   Apolloksesta aksentti poistettu. July 05, 2018 18:51
Annotation Publication/201864/2 (editing)   Apollos muutettu. July 05, 2018 19:01
Annotation Publication/201864/1 (editing)   Apollos muutettu. July 05, 2018 19:01
Annotation Publication/2018623/2 (2018/09/20-15.01.21) (archived)   Kiitos, tässä korjauksin. July 15, 2018 09:56
Annotation Publication/2018623/1 (2018/09/20-15.01.22) (archived)   Kiitos, nyt on _CO:t lisätty. July 15, 2018 09:57
Annotation Publication/2018623/3 (2018/09/20-15.01.21) (archived)   Kiitos! Nyt SBJ riippuu COORD:sta. July 15, 2018 10:03
Annotation Publication/2018623/4 (2018/09/20-15.01.21) (archived)   Kiitos, tässä korjauksin. July 15, 2018 10:03
Annotation Publication/2018623/5 (2018/09/22-12.20.26) (archived)   Kiitos; nyt on muutettu. July 15, 2018 10:10
Annotation Publication/2018623/6 (2018/09/22-12.20.27) (archived)   En huomannutkaan ylimääräistä SU:a. Nyt se on poistettu ja muut muutokset tehty. July 15, 2018 10:11
Annotation Publication/201868/3 (editing)   Kiitos! Pitikö tämä jättää vielä palauttamatta käsialan vaihtumisen takia? Merktsin viimeisessä virkkeessä ἁπλᾶ:n ja εὔσταθμα:n nominatiiveiksi ja ATR:ksi nomismationeille, mutten ole ihan varma tästä. July 15, 2018 10:37
Annotation Publication/2018610/4 (editing)   Kiitos! Toivottavasti nyt on kaikki oikein. Pitäisikö tämäkin jättää kuitenkin vielä odottamaan? July 15, 2018 10:46
Annotation Publication/2018610/2 (2018/09/20-15.01.23) (archived)   Kiitos! Tässä. July 24, 2018 18:37
Annotation Publication/2018610/1 (2018/09/20-15.01.23) (archived)   Kiitos! Tässä. July 24, 2018 18:37
Annotation Publication/2018714/3 (2018/10/26-13.48.19) (archived)   Upz. 1.22 stand. Hei! Olen epävarma joistakin lyhyistäkin virkkeistä tässä, esim. virkkeet 3, 7, ja 10. Lisäksi kirjurin poistama μεν on laitettu virkkeen 6 alkuun: pitäisikö se merkitä jotenkin vai antaa olla noin? Entä tarvitseeko samassa virkkeessä mainittu Mennides merkitä metatietoihin toiseksi vastaanottajaksi? August 02, 2018 09:43
Annotation Publication/2018714/4 (2018/10/26-13.48.19) (archived)   Upz. 1.22 orig. Vrt. standardi. August 02, 2018 09:43
Annotation Publication/2018714/1 (submitted)   UPZ 1.17 stand. Tässä on taas muutama asia, joiden kohdalla epäröin: 2. virke: onko και parempi liittää sanaan εγινετο vai pikemmin sanaan διδυμοι? 4. virke, περιίδῃς: ohjelma tarjoaa lemmaksi περί-εἶδον – onko tämä ok, vai pitäisikö mieluummin olla lemmana περίοιδα? 6. virke, εθος: OBJ vai SBJ? 5. virkkeessä tein muutoksen ἔσόμεθα > ἐσόμεθα, ja ehdotin sitä myös papyri.infoon, missä Editorial Board on merkinnyt muutoksen ’hyväksytyksi’ mutta sitä ei ole vielä lopullisesti vahvistettu. August 03, 2018 10:35
Annotation Publication/2018714/2 (submitted)   UPZ 1.17 orig. Samat asiat kuin standardissa. August 03, 2018 10:35
Annotation Publication/2018714/5 (2019/07/28-15.38.15) (archived)   UPZ 1.30 stand. Tässä jouduin arvailemaan aika paljon. Tulkitsen, että ἐλαικῆς κικιο σησαμίνου viittaa rahojen käyttötarkoitukseen, joten merkitsin sen ADV:ksi, mutten tiedä menikö oikein; en myöskään ole varma, tulkitsinko διδυμῶν -sanan funktion oikein. August 05, 2018 10:50
Annotation Publication/2018714/6 (2019/07/28-15.38.18) (archived)   UPZ 1.30 orig. Samat jutut kuin standardissa. August 05, 2018 10:50
Annotation Publication/2018714/1 (submitted)   - August 06, 2018 12:04
Annotation Publication/2018714/2 (submitted)   - August 06, 2018 12:05
Annotation Publication/2018714/3 (2018/10/26-13.48.19) (archived)   - August 06, 2018 12:14
Annotation Publication/2018714/4 (2018/10/26-13.48.19) (archived)   - August 06, 2018 12:15
Annotation Publication/2018714/1 (submitted)   Muutin vielä kaksosten nimien lemmat samoiksi kuin 18r:ssa. August 06, 2018 14:45
Annotation Publication/2018714/2 (submitted)   Muutin vielä kaksosten nimien lemmat samoiksi kuin 18r:ssa. August 06, 2018 14:45
Annotation Publication/2018714/5 (2019/07/28-15.38.15) (archived)   Kaksosten nimet on nyt 18r:n mukaan. August 06, 2018 14:50
Annotation Publication/2018714/6 (2019/07/28-15.38.18) (archived)   Kaksosten nimet (lemmat siis) ovat nyt 18r:n mukaan. August 06, 2018 14:51
Annotation Publication/2018714/3 (2018/10/26-13.48.19) (archived)   - August 07, 2018 13:01
Annotation Publication/2018714/4 (2018/10/26-13.48.19) (archived)   - August 07, 2018 13:01
Annotation Publication/201888/8 (2018/09/20-15.01.19) (archived)   UPZ 1.29 hand 1b stand. Tälle en osaa paljon mitään tehdä. Vähän epäselvää on, onko συμβουλευ̣[ ̣ ̣ ̣ ̣ ̣]ην yksi vai useampi sana. August 08, 2018 11:01
Annotation Publication/201888/9 (2018/09/20-15.01.19) (archived)   UPZ 1.29 hand 1b orig. August 08, 2018 11:02
Annotation Publication/201883/1 (2019/07/28-15.37.48) (archived)   UPZ 1.29 hand 1a stand. Tässä on samoja pulmia kuin 30:ssa. August 08, 2018 11:13
Annotation Publication/201883/2 (2019/07/28-15.38.22) (archived)   UPZ 1.29 hand 1a orig. Tässä on samoja ongelmia kuin 30:ssa. Lisäksi tässä μετρησον :lle ei ole annettu aksenttia -- pitäisikö se lisätä? August 08, 2018 11:14
Annotation Publication/201888/10 (2018/09/20-15.01.23) (archived)   Upz. 1.31 stand. Hei! Tämäkään ei ole aivan helppo. 3. virkkeessä en oikein keksi, mihin ensimmäinen τε pitäisi kiinnittää. August 10, 2018 10:48
Annotation Publication/201888/11 (2018/09/20-15.01.23) (archived)   Upz. 1.31 orig. Vrt. standardi. August 10, 2018 10:49
Annotation Publication/201887/5 (submitted)   UPZ 1.24 stand. Tämä onkin tosi haastava teksti. Virkkeessä 11 poistin sanasta ἔχούσας ylim. aksentin, ja ehdotin muutosta myös papyri.infoon. August 13, 2018 08:46
Annotation Publication/201887/6 (submitted)   UPZ 1.24 orig. Poistin ἔχούσας sanasta ylim. aksentin virkkeessä 11. August 13, 2018 08:46
Annotation Publication/2018813/9 (2018/12/19-08.26.20) (archived)   Upz. 1.36 hand 2, stand. August 13, 2018 11:54
Annotation Publication/2018813/10 (2018/12/19-08.26.19) (archived)   Upz. 1.36 hand 2, orig. August 13, 2018 11:55
Annotation Publication/2018813/11 (2018/12/19-08.26.20) (archived)   Upz. 1.36 hand 3 stand. August 13, 2018 12:01
Annotation Publication/2018813/12 (2018/12/19-08.26.20) (archived)   Upz. 1.36 hand 3 orig. Pitäisikö tässä Dorionin nimi täydentää 1. virkkeeseen? Se on säilynyt kokonaisena 4. käsialalla kirjoitettujen rivien alussa. August 13, 2018 12:02
Annotation Publication/2018714/1 (submitted)   Kiitos! No niin, nyt on muutokset tehty. 3. virke on tosiaan vähän vaikeaselkoinen. August 14, 2018 11:38
Annotation Publication/2018714/2 (submitted)   Kiitos! Tässä muutoksin. August 14, 2018 11:38
Annotation Publication/2018812/1 (submitted)   Upz. 1.33 hand 1 stand. Tässä onkin paljon pähkäiltävää. August 15, 2018 09:16
Annotation Publication/2018812/2 (editing)   Upz. 1.33 hand 1 orig. August 15, 2018 09:16
Annotation Publication/2018812/2 (editing)   Hei vielä! Tässä 4. virkkeessä μητε (= μηποτε ?) ja συνεργεισας (substantiivi vai verbi?) ovat onglemallisia. August 15, 2018 09:24
Annotation Publication/2018813/3 (2018/12/19-08.26.19) (archived)   Upz. 1.34 stand. Tässä oli se pulmallinen ἀνθ᾽ ὧν, 5. virkkeessä. August 15, 2018 09:29
Annotation Publication/2018813/4 (2018/12/19-08.26.19) (archived)   Upz. 1.34 orig. August 15, 2018 09:30
Annotation Publication/2018714/5 (2019/07/28-15.38.15) (archived)   Kiitos! Näinhän tämä onkin paljon selvempi. Mutta mihin διωβολον -sanat pitäisi kiinnittää (jos drakhmoihin, olisivatko ne ATR vai APOS?). Entä pitäisikö μγ korjata standardissa μβ:ksi? August 19, 2018 12:29
Annotation Publication/2018714/6 (2019/07/28-15.38.18) (archived)   Kiitos. Διωβολον -sanojen merkinnästä olen vielä epävarma (vrt. standardi). August 19, 2018 12:30
Annotation Publication/2018714/1 (submitted)   Hei! Poistin vielä aksentin Memfiin nimestä, kun se näyttää olevan sillä tavalla Trismegistoksessa. August 19, 2018 12:55
Annotation Publication/2018714/2 (submitted)   Memfis muutettu (ks. standardi). August 19, 2018 12:57
Annotation Publication/2018714/3 (2018/10/26-13.48.19) (archived)   Poistin tässäkin vielä Memfiistä aksentin, kun Trismegistoksessa aksentti on näköjään jätetty pois. Toivottavasti näitä ei jäänyt enempää, katsoin mielestäni kaikki läpi. August 19, 2018 13:05
Annotation Publication/2018714/4 (2018/10/26-13.48.19) (archived)   Memfiistä vielä aksentti poistettu (ks. standardi). August 19, 2018 13:05
Annotation Publication/201882/11 (submitted)   Upz. 1.27 hand 1 stand. Tässä on 2. virke tosi pitkä. Pitäisikö vuosiluvut laittaa mieluummin ATR:eiksi μετρητης-sanoille? Entä olisiko toimivampi ratkaisu ottaa τους δε -sanoja edeltävä pilkku COORD:ksi δε:lle ja ensimmäiselle και:lle? August 19, 2018 20:43
Annotation Publication/201882/12 (submitted)   Upz. 1.27 hand 1 orig. Samoja juttuja kuin standardissa. August 19, 2018 20:43
Annotation Publication/201882/9 (submitted)   Upz. 1.27 hand 2 stand. August 19, 2018 20:51
Annotation Publication/201882/10 (submitted)   Upz. 1.27 hand 2 orig. Tämä on tosi fagmentaarinen -- pitäisiköhän tässä jättää enemmän tulkinnasta avoimeksi? August 19, 2018 20:52
Annotation Publication/2018714/3 (2018/10/26-13.48.19) (archived)   Kiitos! Aivan totta. (Olisihan minun pitänyt toki tajuta AcI-rakenne.) Merkitsin nyt AcI-rakenteiden akk.-partisiipit SBJ:ksi -- onko näin ok? August 20, 2018 12:49
Annotation Publication/2018714/4 (2018/10/26-13.48.19) (archived)   Kiitos! Tässä. Olin näköjään hieman huolimaton. August 20, 2018 12:59
Annotation Publication/201887/5 (submitted)   Korjasin vielä virkkeet 5 ja 9 AcI:n mukaisiksi, kuten 23:ssa. August 20, 2018 13:06
Annotation Publication/201887/6 (submitted)   - August 20, 2018 13:06
Annotation Publication/2018813/11 (2018/12/19-08.26.20) (archived)   - August 20, 2018 13:14
Annotation Publication/2018813/9 (2018/12/19-08.26.20) (archived)   - August 20, 2018 13:14
Annotation Publication/2018813/13 (2018/12/19-08.26.19) (archived)   Upz. 1.36 hand 4 stand. August 20, 2018 13:57
Annotation Publication/2018813/14 (2018/12/19-08.26.19) (archived)   Upz. 1.36 hand 4 stand. August 20, 2018 13:58
Annotation Publication/2018714/1 (submitted)   Kiitos! Onko 3.2 καὶ siis parempi näin vai pääpredikaatin alla? Jos predikaatin, AuxY vai AuxZ? August 20, 2018 14:21
Annotation Publication/2018714/2 (submitted)   Kiitos! August 20, 2018 14:21
Annotation Publication/2018714/3 (2018/10/26-13.48.19) (archived)   Kiitos. Jospa nyt olisi kaikki kunnossa. August 20, 2018 15:15
Annotation Publication/2018714/4 (2018/10/26-13.48.19) (archived)   Tässä. August 20, 2018 15:15
Annotation Publication/2018714/2 (submitted)   Kiitos! August 20, 2018 15:18
Annotation Publication/2018714/1 (submitted)   Kiitos! August 20, 2018 15:18
Annotation Publication/201886/3 (submitted)   Upz.1.26 stand. Tässä on taas asioita, joiden suhteen olen epävarma: 3. virkeessä, onko ἐπιδέδωκεν alisteinen επει :lle (ja δε:lle)? Entä onko και pikemmin COORD vai AuxY? Viimeisessä virkkeessä editiossa lukee μ’η̣νη̣α̣ς, mutta täällä tämä on näin ilman heittomerkin näköistä merkkiä. En ole myöskään varma, ymmärränkö 9. virkettä, vaikka se näyttääkin tosi yksinkertaiselta. Tässä tein lisäksi muutaman muutoksen, joista olikin jo puhe: virkkeessä 3 lisäsin välilyönnin ennen Δωρίων-sanaa; virkkeessä 6 korjasin standardissa μετηρταὶ :n μετρηταὶ :ksi (originaalissa lyhenne), ja σύνβολα :n σύμβολα :ksi (standardissa. August 21, 2018 15:21
Annotation Publication/201886/4 (submitted)   Upz. 1.26 orig. Vrt. stand. August 21, 2018 15:21
Annotation Publication/2018813/7 (2018/12/19-08.26.18) (archived)   UPZ 1.36 hand 1 stand. Tässä tein standardissa virkkeessä 3 muutoksen δοῖ > δῶι.Mihin μήποτε virkkeessä 4 pitäisi kiinnittää, ja millä tagilla? (ADV, AuxY, vai AuxZ?) Entä pitäisikö virkkeessä 5 tuleviksi toivotut asiat olla pikemmin SBJ_CO kuin PNOM_CO? August 28, 2018 11:52
Annotation Publication/2018813/8 (2018/12/19-08.26.19) (archived)   UPZ 1.36 hand 1 orig. Samoja asioita kuin standardissa. August 28, 2018 11:53
Annotation Publication/2018813/8 (2018/12/19-08.26.19) (archived)   - August 28, 2018 12:18
Annotation Publication/2018813/7 (2018/12/19-08.26.18) (archived)   (Sori, tein vielä pienen muutoksen, eli μηποτε ADV > AuxZ, koska huomasin tehneeni niin 33:ssa ja 34:ssa.) August 28, 2018 12:20
Annotation Publication/2018813/5 (2018/12/19-08.26.19) (archived)   Upz. 1.35 stand. Vrt. 36 (ja 33 ja 34) stand. Tässä tein seuraavat muutokset: Virke 4 (rivi 18): λάβανω > λαμβάνω (näin Wilckenin editiossa). (Vrt. Upz. 1.33, 34, ja 36: λάβωσιν.) Virke 5 (rivi 25): γίνοιτω > γίνοιτο standardissa. Virke 5 (rivi 27): Erotin sanat διάκεισαι (originaalissa ιδιάκεισαι) ja καὶ toisistaan. Virke 8 (rivi 31): ἐπισκέψαμένους > ἐπισκεψαμένους (vain standardissa). (rivit 32 – 33): ἐπισκεψαμένον > ἐπισκεψάμενον (standardissa). August 28, 2018 12:25
Annotation Publication/2018813/6 (2018/12/19-08.26.19) (archived)   UPZ 1.35 orig. Vrt. stand, ja 33, 34, 35. Tässä pari kysymystä: Virke 4: mikä lemmaksi μη:lle? (Standardissa μήποτε, vrt. 33, 34, ja 36.) Virkkeessä 11 sanasta ἐπισκεψαμενους puuttuu aksentti. August 28, 2018 12:26
Annotation Publication/2018816/1 (2018/12/23-11.16.27) (archived)   Upz. 1.14 hand 2 stand. En ole ihan varma, onko tämä paras tulkinta ("[Tämä on] määräys Apolloniokselle" tms.). August 28, 2018 13:40
Annotation Publication/2018816/2 (2018/12/23-11.16.27) (archived)   Upz. 1.14 hand 2 orig. August 28, 2018 13:41
Annotation Publication/201888/10 (2018/09/20-15.01.23) (archived)   Kiitos! Tässä olikin aika paljon korjattavaa. Muutin vielä ημιολιαι :n ATR:ksi, kun se oli aiemmin ADV; vastaavasti muutin βασιλει ja βασιλισσηι -sanat ATR:eiksi, kun ne aiemmin olivat OBJ-tunnuksella. Kohdassa 3.10 ja 3.12 en kuitenkaan vielä tehnyt επαναγκαιον ja ανεπιεικες -sanoille mitään, koska eikös tuo jälkimmäinen pikemmin näytä neutri- kuin maskuliinimuodolta? (Ainakin ediittori on näemmä tulkinnut sen siten.) September 04, 2018 14:05
Annotation Publication/201888/11 (2018/09/20-15.01.23) (archived)   Kiitos; tässä korjauksin, ja vielä samat muutama juttu kuin standardissa. September 04, 2018 14:07
Annotation Publication/201894/2 (submitted)   Upz. 1.37 stand. Hei! Tässä päädyin laittamaan δὲ:n AuzZ:ksi virkkeissä 6, 8, ja 15 (vastaavasti μὲν virkkeessä 14) -- en ole kuitenkaan varma ratkaisusta. Virkkeessä 15 myös kuukauden nimi (H)Athyr on vähän hankala sijoitettava. September 06, 2018 19:08
Annotation Publication/201894/3 (submitted)   Upz. 1.37 orig. Vrt. stand. September 06, 2018 19:08
Annotation Publication/2018714/5 (2019/07/28-15.38.15) (archived)   Kiitos; totta tosiaan! Uusi yritys... September 11, 2018 22:08
Annotation Publication/2018714/6 (2019/07/28-15.38.18) (archived)   Oho, olinpa huolimaton. Tässä nyt viimeisin versio! September 11, 2018 22:11
Annotation Publication/201894/4 (submitted)   Upz. 1.38 stand. Hi! This is not one of the easiest. In sentence 2, should the first μετρητὰς be atteched to the tree or not? Sentence 7 is neither very clear: where should Τῦβι be attached? September 13, 2018 09:22
Annotation Publication/201894/5 (submitted)   Upz. 1.38 orig. Cf. standard. Here I have some additional questions: Sentence 2: προνοεῖσθαι – which verb to mark as lemma? Sentence 7: ἀνενενεγχθεντου seems to agree with Dorion – should the tree thus be organised in some other way in the original? Sentence 8: Σαραπωνι and sentence 9: Μεννιδει – SBJ or OBJ? September 13, 2018 09:22
Annotation Publication/201883/1 (2019/07/28-15.37.48) (archived)   My apologies, I make so many mistakes... Aren't Taues and Taous passive agents here, though (i.e. OBJ)? I could be wrong, but that's what I gather from the German translation as well. September 15, 2018 15:42
Annotation Publication/201883/2 (2019/07/28-15.38.22) (archived)   Thank you. I have the same question about the twins' agency as in the standard. September 15, 2018 15:43
Annotation Publication/2018714/5 (2019/07/28-15.38.15) (archived)   Thank you! I let myself be misled by the German with regard to the twins. September 15, 2018 15:49
Annotation Publication/2018714/6 (2019/07/28-15.38.18) (archived)   Thank you. September 15, 2018 15:50
Annotation Publication/201885/1 (submitted)   UPZ 1.23 stand. Hi; I'm not sure if και νυν in sentence 13 ought to be attached to the (elliptical) predicate or to δουναι. September 19, 2018 07:26
Annotation Publication/201885/2 (submitted)   UPZ 1.23 orig. Cf. standard. September 19, 2018 07:26
Annotation Publication/2018623/5 (2018/09/22-12.20.26) (archived)   Kiitos! / Thank you! September 20, 2018 13:19
Annotation Publication/2018615/12 (2019/07/28-15.44.12) (archived)   Kiitos! Nyt on korjaukset tehty. September 21, 2018 07:08
Annotation Publication/2018615/13 (2019/07/28-15.44.09) (archived)   Kiitos. September 21, 2018 07:08
Annotation Publication/2018620/3 (2018/10/26-13.48.19) (archived)   Kiitos! Pitääkö kuun nimi korjata tekstiinkin aksentittomaksi? Lemmana näyttää jo olevan aksentiton (ja suvuton) muoto. (Korjasitko sinä sen vai minä?) September 21, 2018 07:18
Annotation Publication/2018620/4 (2018/10/26-13.48.19) (archived)   Kiitos! Unohdin vielä kysyä, pitäisikö tässäkin epävarman nimen lemmaks laittaa Εὐήθιος, vai jättää lemma auki? September 21, 2018 07:21
Annotation Publication/2018621/1 (submitted)   P.Mich.13.669 hand 1 stand. Hi! This is a tricky one. In the first sentence, I put Τσεπνα as lemma (without accent, as fem.), although it is not given very clearly in Trismegistos. Also in the first sentence, I wonder if instead of θυγατρος there should be θυγατρι (to agree with the datives at the beginning of the sentence). September 23, 2018 10:33
Annotation Publication/2018621/2 (submitted)   P.Mich.13.669 hand 1 orig. Cf. stand. September 23, 2018 10:33
Annotation Publication/2018922/12 (2019/01/17-13.32.33) (archived)   Upz. 1.21 hand 3b orig. September 25, 2018 20:44
Annotation Publication/2018922/11 (2019/01/17-13.32.33) (archived)   Upz. 1.21 hand 3b stand. September 25, 2018 20:44
Annotation Publication/2018920/6 (2019/01/19-20.01.20) (archived)   UPZ 1.28 stand. Hi! I wonder if the γραμματευς in senctence no. 4 refers to Mennides rather than Apollonios (despite the lack of του). And should I do something with the words deleted in Antiquity or leave them un-annotated? September 27, 2018 20:36
Annotation Publication/2018920/7 (2019/01/19-20.01.20) (archived)   UPZ 1.28 orig. Cf. standard. September 27, 2018 20:37
Annotation Publication/201886/3 (submitted)   Tässä ja originaalissa oli jäänyt vielä väärä lemma (Θαυς) toisen kaksosen nimelle. September 30, 2018 10:58
Annotation Publication/201886/4 (submitted)   - September 30, 2018 10:58
Annotation Publication/2018929/3 (submitted)   UPZ 1.49 stand. Hi! Should I create an elliptical PRED here? October 01, 2018 06:45
Annotation Publication/2018929/4 (submitted)   UPZ 1.49 orig. Cf. standard. October 01, 2018 06:46
Annotation Publication/2018623/7 (submitted)   P.Mich.13.663 hand 1 stand. Hi; I'm finally sending this, though there are many things I'm still not sure of. The name Strategia / Stratekeia is spelled differently in orig and stand -- both forms are in Trismegistos, but neither seems to be found in any other papyrus. In sentence 2, is ανεμποδιστως positive or superlativa? Some of the formulae occur in P. Mich. 13.662 and 664, but I can't figure out the significance of some of the elements in the fragmented beginning of the text. October 02, 2018 08:41
Annotation Publication/2018623/8 (submitted)   P.Mich.13.663 hand 1 orig. Cf. standard. October 02, 2018 08:42
Annotation Publication/2018623/8 (submitted)   - October 02, 2018 14:12
Annotation Publication/2018922/5 (2019/02/09-12.32.32) (archived)   UPZ 1.21 hand 2 stand. Very little seems to be preserved in the original -- should this be left out, thus? October 06, 2018 09:44
Annotation Publication/2018922/6 (2019/02/09-12.32.32) (archived)   UPZ 1.21 hand 2 orig. Cf. standard. October 06, 2018 09:44
Annotation Publication/2018922/7 (2019/02/25-15.30.38) (archived)   UPZ 1.21 hand 3a stand. October 06, 2018 09:54
Annotation Publication/2018922/8 (2019/02/25-15.30.34) (archived)   UPZ 1.21 hand 3a orig. October 06, 2018 09:54
Annotation Publication/2018926/13 (2019/09/05-13.45.40) (archived)   UPZ 1.20 hand 5. The ending of sentence 8 is unintelligible to me. October 06, 2018 19:07
Annotation Publication/2018926/14 (2019/09/05-13.45.46) (archived)   UPZ 1.20 hand 5 orig. Cf. standard. October 06, 2018 19:08
Annotation Publication/2018929/4 (submitted)   - October 06, 2018 20:52
Annotation Publication/2018929/3 (submitted)   - October 06, 2018 20:52
Annotation Publication/2018929/1 (submitted)   UPZ 1.48 stand. Hi! Should I create an elliptical sencond PRED_CO in sentence three? (It is cut short in the middle, cf. UPZ 1.47 and 50.) October 07, 2018 12:03
Annotation Publication/2018929/2 (submitted)   UPZ 1.48 orig. Cf. standard. October 07, 2018 12:03
Annotation Publication/201888/15 (submitted)   UPZ 1.32 stand. Here, I'm not sure where to attach καθοτι in sentence 2. In the same sentence, should I attach the surplus ετους (SR in standard) to the tree (to A=ετους as ATR?)? And, in sentence 3, should τουτου be marked as PNOM rather than SBJ? October 08, 2018 07:23
Annotation Publication/201888/16 (submitted)   UPZ 1.32 orig. Cf. standard. October 08, 2018 07:23
Annotation Publication/2018812/1 (submitted)   Thank you! I wonder why οσιοτης is suggested here as masculine (of course, I should have realised it is not). October 10, 2018 06:54
Annotation Publication/2018812/2 (editing)   Thanks. October 10, 2018 06:54
Annotation Publication/2018813/3 (2018/12/19-08.26.19) (archived)   Ok, thank you. October 10, 2018 07:00
Annotation Publication/2018813/4 (2018/12/19-08.26.19) (archived)   Cheers! October 10, 2018 07:00
Annotation Publication/2018813/7 (2018/12/19-08.26.18) (archived)   Thank you; here with corrections! October 11, 2018 11:12
Annotation Publication/2018813/8 (2018/12/19-08.26.19) (archived)   Thanks. Sorry, I missed the deletion. Is it fine thus? October 11, 2018 11:19
Annotation Publication/2018813/5 (2018/12/19-08.26.19) (archived)   Thank you; here. October 11, 2018 20:42
Annotation Publication/2018813/6 (2018/12/19-08.26.19) (archived)   Thanks!; here with corrections. October 11, 2018 20:48
Annotation Publication/201896/23 (submitted)   UPZ 1.42 stand. Hi! I’d like to remark a few things: In sentence 3, I’m not sure if αναγκης and λιμου are not passive agents, thus OBJ rather than ADV, so too with υφ’ υμων in sentence 6. Also, I’m not sure whither ως should be attached. The gender of ολιγων is also enigmatic to me. In sentence 5, I’m not sure what to do with διο and the first και; the same goes for the first δε in sentence 6 and και in sentence 7. The structure καθ’ ας εποιεισθ’ … παρουσιας, in sentence 5, is problematic. Sentence 9 is especially tricky, and so is sentence 10, where I created the two OM:s – I’m not sure if this is the best solution, but an omission is implied in the edition, and the German translation seems to suggest at least two words are missing (“tell” or sth equivalent, and perhaps ωστε?). In sentence 10, I also changed the accent in δέοντων, but haven’t suggested that in papyri.info. October 12, 2018 09:58
Annotation Publication/201896/24 (submitted)   UPZ 1.42 orig. Please see standard. October 12, 2018 09:59
Annotation Publication/201882/3 (2019/03/24-13.13.41) (archived)   UPZ 1.25 hand 2 stand. What to do with this? October 14, 2018 08:32
Annotation Publication/201882/4 (committed)   UPZ 1.25 hand 2 orig. October 14, 2018 08:32
Annotation Publication/20181013/4 (2019/07/28-15.43.00) (archived)   UPZ 1.41 hand 2. What to do with this? I created ἑνκαιεικοστός, it's not in the dictionary, nor in TLG. October 14, 2018 08:52
Annotation Publication/20181013/5 (2019/07/28-15.42.58) (archived)   UPZ 1.41 hand 2 orig. Cf. stand. October 14, 2018 08:53
Annotation Publication/201882/1 (submitted)   UPZ 1.25 hand 1a b stand.Hi! In sentence 3 I made an elliptical PRED, though I wonder επιδεδωκεν should rather be taken as PRED. Sentence 6 is very difficult. October 15, 2018 11:05
Annotation Publication/201882/2 (submitted)   UPZ 1.25 hand 1a b orig. Cf. stand. October 15, 2018 11:05
Annotation Publication/201886/3 (submitted)   I made yet some changes (for sentence 3, please cf. 25 hand 1 stand; I didn't get the subordinate structure in the end of the sentence earlier, so you may forget the earlier question). The commas in sentence 6 are differently from UPZ 1.25. October 15, 2018 11:31
Annotation Publication/201886/4 (submitted)   - October 15, 2018 11:31
Annotation Publication/201882/2 (submitted)   - October 15, 2018 11:33
Annotation Publication/201882/1 (submitted)   - October 15, 2018 11:33
Annotation Publication/201882/11 (submitted)   Kiitos! Noudatetaan OBJ APOS -ratkaisua. Koordinaattien suhteen olen näköjään noudattanut 25:ssa erilaista ratkaisua, jossa δε on ylin COORD ja και AuxY -- kumpiko on parempi? Tai toisaalta voisiko και:n laittaa δε:lle alisteiseksi COORD:ksi, tai ottaa pilkun COORD:ksi molemmille? October 16, 2018 10:11
Annotation Publication/201882/12 (submitted)   Kiitos, tässä! October 16, 2018 10:12
Annotation Publication/201895/13 (submitted)   UPZ 1.39 stand. Hi! Sentence 2 is very difficult. I created an OM element where there is < > in the edition, but I’m not sure I can make sense of the whole παρελκομένων part. Are the twins the subject here, or the things that are being withheld(?) from them? Also, perhaps τα μεν and τα δε are ADV rather than OBJ? And should I mark ελαιου as APOS to καθηκοντος here as well (as I decided to follow that solution in 27 hand 1)? Sentence 5 takes its time, too… Here, εἰς .< > ἀγαγεῖν in the ed. shows as εἰς G ἀγαγεῖν in Arethusa. October 16, 2018 10:28
Annotation Publication/201895/14 (submitted)   UPZ 1.39 orig. Please see standard. October 16, 2018 10:28
Annotation Publication/201882/9 (submitted)   Kiitos! Tämä on sama teksti (jos täydennetty oikein) kuin hand 1:n lopussa. October 17, 2018 13:56
Annotation Publication/201882/10 (submitted)   Kiitos! October 17, 2018 13:56
Annotation Publication/20181017/19 (submitted)   UPZ 1.45 hand 2 orig. Cf. standard. October 17, 2018 14:27
Annotation Publication/20181017/18 (submitted)   UPZ 1.45 hand 2 stand. Can I delete this? October 17, 2018 14:28
Annotation Publication/2018714/1 (submitted)   - October 17, 2018 15:24
Annotation Publication/2018714/2 (submitted)   - October 17, 2018 15:25
Annotation Publication/201894/2 (submitted)   - October 17, 2018 15:26
Annotation Publication/201894/3 (submitted)   - October 17, 2018 15:26
Annotation Publication/201894/5 (submitted)   - October 17, 2018 15:29
Annotation Publication/201894/4 (submitted)   - October 17, 2018 15:30
Annotation Publication/2018929/3 (submitted)   - October 17, 2018 15:38
Annotation Publication/2018929/4 (submitted)   - October 17, 2018 15:38
Annotation Publication/201882/1 (submitted)   Changed the καθηκοντα thing in the last sentence. I'm still not sure what to do with coordinators. October 17, 2018 20:00
Annotation Publication/201882/2 (submitted)   Changed the καθηκοντα structure as agreed. October 17, 2018 20:02
Annotation Publication/201886/3 (submitted)   Made some changes. October 17, 2018 20:07
Annotation Publication/201886/4 (submitted)   Made some changes. October 17, 2018 20:07
Annotation Publication/201882/1 (submitted)   And corrected errors I just made... October 17, 2018 20:10
Annotation Publication/201882/2 (submitted)   - October 17, 2018 20:10
Annotation Publication/201885/1 (submitted)   I made changes in sentences 2 and 8, but I'm still not sure about everything. October 17, 2018 20:28
Annotation Publication/201885/2 (submitted)   - October 17, 2018 20:28
Annotation Publication/2018813/5 (2018/12/19-08.26.19) (archived)   Hi! In sentence 4, I have now followed the guidance on 27, i.e. making καθηκοντα OBJ and the oils APOS_CO, but I'm not absolutely certain the solution is preferable here -- what do you think? October 17, 2018 20:34
Annotation Publication/2018813/6 (2018/12/19-08.26.19) (archived)   Please see standard. October 17, 2018 20:34
Annotation Publication/2018813/7 (2018/12/19-08.26.18) (archived)   Hi! In sentence 4, I have now followed the guidance on 27, i.e. making καθηκοντα OBJ and the oils APOS_CO, but I'm not absolutely certain the solution is preferable here -- what do you think? October 17, 2018 20:40
Annotation Publication/2018813/8 (2018/12/19-08.26.19) (archived)   Please see standard and 25. October 17, 2018 20:40
Annotation Publication/2018813/3 (2018/12/19-08.26.19) (archived)   Hi! In sentence 4, I have now followed the guidance on 27, i.e. making καθηκοντα OBJ and the oils APOS_CO, but I'm not absolutely certain the solution is preferable here -- what do you think? Please cf. 35 and 36. October 17, 2018 20:44
Annotation Publication/2018813/4 (2018/12/19-08.26.19) (archived)   Please see standard, 35, and 36. October 17, 2018 20:44
Annotation Publication/201888/15 (submitted)   - October 17, 2018 20:52
Annotation Publication/201888/16 (submitted)   - October 17, 2018 20:52
Annotation Publication/2018929/1 (submitted)   - October 17, 2018 20:54
Annotation Publication/2018929/2 (submitted)   - October 17, 2018 20:55
Annotation Publication/201887/6 (submitted)   - October 17, 2018 21:01
Annotation Publication/201887/5 (submitted)   - October 17, 2018 21:01
Annotation Publication/2018816/3 (submitted)   UPZ 1.15 stand. Hi! In sentence 7, I replaced διδόιησαν with διδοίησαν in the standard (in the Perseids, only), but not διδώιησαν in the original -- should I change the accentuation there, too? I still struggle with deciding between OBJ and ADV in places, e.g. 3-26 ἐμὲ. October 18, 2018 10:18
Annotation Publication/2018816/4 (submitted)   UPZ 1.15 stand. Hi! In sentence 7, I replaced διδόιησαν with διδοίησαν in the standard (in the Perseids, only), but not διδώιησαν in the original -- should I change the accentuation there, too? I still struggle with deciding between OBJ and ADV in places, e.g. 3-26 ἐμὲ. October 18, 2018 10:18
Annotation Publication/2018816/3 (submitted)   - October 20, 2018 19:31
Annotation Publication/2018816/4 (submitted)   - October 20, 2018 19:31
Annotation Publication/2018816/7 (submitted)   UPZ 1.16 stand. Hi! In sentence 3, I changed αὐτον to αὐτὸν in Perseids / Arethusa, but haven't suggested it in PN. October 20, 2018 20:15
Annotation Publication/2018816/6 (submitted)   UPZ 1.16 orig. Please cf. stand. October 20, 2018 20:16
Annotation Publication/20181026/11 (submitted)   UPZ 1.46 hand 2a stand. Perhaps this is not worth annotating? October 26, 2018 09:54
Annotation Publication/20181026/12 (submitted)   UPZ 1.46 hand 2a orig. Perhaps this is not worth annotating? October 26, 2018 09:54
Annotation Publication/2018928/20 (submitted)   UPZ 1.47 stand. 2-26: Changed οὖ to οὗ here, not in PN. 4-4: In the Sematia and Papyrus Annotation Guidelines, it says that “if several coordinators, only the final is COORD, and others AuxY, depending on the COORD”; yet we discussed earlier that in μεν … δε structures μεν should depend rather on the first item coordinated, not on the coordinating δε, so I’ve followed that here. 4-14 ημας: OBJ_CO or ADV_CO? 4-20: Should εως here be taken morphologically as preposition rather than conjunction? 4-45 What to do with αλλ’? 4-64: Is καθοτι here morphologically adverb or conjunction? October 29, 2018 09:06
Annotation Publication/2018928/21 (submitted)   UPZ 1.48 orig. Please cf. stand. 4-33 I’m not sure if τ should be taken as αντι in the original, but UPZ 1.46 supports this interpretation. October 29, 2018 09:07
Annotation Publication/2018928/20 (submitted)   - October 29, 2018 11:32
Annotation Publication/2018928/21 (submitted)   - October 29, 2018 11:33
Annotation Publication/2018929/2 (submitted)   - October 29, 2018 12:14
Annotation Publication/2018929/1 (submitted)   (made some minor changes...) October 29, 2018 12:15
Annotation Publication/20181026/13 (submitted)   UPZ 1.46 hand 2b stand. Hi! What, here and in the original, ought to be done with Ἀσκληπίου? In the standard it should probably be Ἀσκληπιείου (cf. UPZ 1.47 and 50), but it is unclear whether the error is of the editor or of the scribe. I added an accent to ουτε. On the gender and accentuation of κυλληστις / κυλλαστις, please see comments on 47 standard. October 29, 2018 13:48
Annotation Publication/20181026/14 (submitted)   UPZ 1.46 hand 2b orig. Cf. stand. October 29, 2018 13:49
Annotation Publication/20181026/13 (submitted)   Or perhaps Asklepios is right? However, the accentuation differs from that in the dictionary and in Trismegistos. October 29, 2018 13:58
Annotation Publication/20181026/14 (submitted)   - October 29, 2018 13:59
Annotation Publication/20181026/15 (submitted)   UPZ 1.46 hand 2c stand. Hi! διαλογισαμενους here is puzzling. Should και be taken as coordinating it or συνταχιν? On Asklepios, please see comments on hand 2b standard. October 29, 2018 14:06
Annotation Publication/20181026/16 (submitted)   UPZ 1.46 hand 2c orig. Please cf. stand and hand 2b stand. October 29, 2018 14:07
Annotation Publication/20181026/3 (submitted)   UPZ 1.46 hand 1a-d. Hi! Please note I have combined here all the text written by hand one; and please see comments to UPZ 1.47 standard. A few notes and questions: 1-5: I added a iota to ὑποδιοκητῆι both in stand and orig, but not in PN. 5-7: Should the lemma for προθύμως be the adjective (so I gather from the new instructions, but I'm not sure if what is said there applies to the adverbial ending -ως or only to neuter forms used as adverbs)? The verso (sentence[s] 7) is very unclear: perhaps I should take Μεννιδει τω επιμελητηι separately, with an elliptical PRED, and take χρηματισαι as PRED head for a sentence 8? The function of οντα remains a mystery, nevertheless. October 30, 2018 09:03
Annotation Publication/20181026/4 (submitted)   UPZ 1.46 hand 1a-d orig. Please cf. comments on stand and 47 stand. October 30, 2018 09:04
Annotation Publication/20181013/2 (submitted)   UPZ 1.41 hand 1a b stand. Hi! I have a few questions. 5-3 καθηκον : ought this be taken as OBJ to εκτεθεικαν, and the oils as its ATRs? 5-18 ἐκτέθεικαν : should there be -κεν in the standard? 5-20 ταυθ’ : SBJ or PNOM (or what)? 5-23 πλειστην : lemma πλειστος or πολυς? 6-25 and 6-53 τε : adverb or conjunction (morphologically)? 6-35 παν το εξης : what exactly is the meaning of this? I interpret here as “all the rest” or something similar, but I wonder if παν should rather be taken as the OBJ and το εξης as a separate ADV (“in times to come” or sth similar). November 03, 2018 10:30
Annotation Publication/20181013/3 (submitted)   UPZ 1.41 hand 1a b orig. Please see comments on the standard. November 03, 2018 10:31
Annotation Publication/2018928/18 (submitted)   UPZ 1.44 hand 1. Hi! It seems here, in sentence one, there is και αυτων, or και καιτων in the original, although in the print edition there is just καυτων / καιτων. Perhaps I should change this to κ- αυτων / κ- αιτων, respectively, or leave it as it stands in the standard, but change it to κ- αιτων in the original? I don’t really understand the meaning of the whole και των … καθ αυτας (orig. αυτων) sequence, nor why ”twins” is repeated. Should I create an artificial PRED in sentence two? November 03, 2018 11:31
Annotation Publication/2018928/19 (submitted)   UPZ 1.44 orig. Hi! Same issues as in the standard. In addition, there is actually a Πτόλεος in Trismegistos, according to which that is the name in question in this document, not Ptolemaios. November 03, 2018 11:34
Annotation Publication/20181023/10 (submitted)   UPZ 1.55 hand 2 stand. What to do with this? November 08, 2018 10:15
Annotation Publication/20181023/11 (submitted)   UPZ 1.55 hand 2 orig. What to do with this? November 08, 2018 10:15
Annotation Publication/20181023/12 (submitted)   UPZ 1.55 hand 3 stand. Perhaps I should leave this unannotated? November 08, 2018 10:16
Annotation Publication/20181023/13 (submitted)   UPZ 1.55 hand 3 orig. Perhaps I should leave this unannotated? November 08, 2018 10:17
Annotation Publication/20181017/16 (submitted)   UPZ 1.45 hand 1a b stand. Hi! This is very difficult, I think I must have made some mistakes. Should the lemma for δέκατον be δεκατος or ενδεκατος in the standard? (As there is an εν- affix added by an apparently different hand.) November 08, 2018 17:46
Annotation Publication/20181017/17 (submitted)   UPZ 1.45 hand 1a b orig. Please cf. comments on the standard, and please check these both very carefully, since this is a very difficult text to annotate! November 08, 2018 17:47
Annotation Publication/201895/41 (submitted)   UPZ 1.40 stand. Please cf. UPZ 1.39. In sentence 4 (token 41), I changed τῆν to τὴν in the standard. The original is very badly preserved. November 16, 2018 08:47
Annotation Publication/201895/42 (submitted)   UPZ 1.40 orig. This is very badly preserved; there might be too much conjecture in my annotation suggestions. Please cf. UPZ 1.39. November 16, 2018 08:48
Annotation Publication/2018115/32 (submitted)   UPZ 1.57 stand. Hi! A few notes / questions: In sentence 4, the εθος εστι structure, and in sentence 10 the (corresponding) structure ευγνωμον … εστι αφελειν … και δουναι are problematic (which is SBJ and which PNOM?). In sentences 7 and 10, there is οὖν as second word in the sentence – ought this be hung on the first verb that follows, or on a following coordinator? (If the latter, which coordinator in sentence 7?) 7-20 αὐτῶν : ought this be interpreted as ADV (“take the bread from them”) or as ATR to αρτους (“take their bread”)? 7-31 λειτουργῷ : I deleted the final iota subscr. (in the standard). November 17, 2018 14:45
Annotation Publication/2018115/33 (submitted)   UPZ 1.57 orig. Please cf. standard. In addition, in sentence 11, how to interpret the forms ἀντιλεγων and Ἀσκληπίου – ought the latter be taken to refer to the god or to the sanctuary? November 17, 2018 14:45
Annotation Publication/2018813/7 (2018/12/19-08.26.18) (archived)   Thanks! In sentence 3, I can change the προς (token 24) to depend on εχεις ; but I would like to note first that there is πρὸς θεῶν ὁσιότης and πρὸς τοὺς θεούς ὁσιότης in LSJ (s.v. ὁσιότης). November 18, 2018 10:48
Annotation Publication/2018813/8 (2018/12/19-08.26.19) (archived)   Thanks; here. November 18, 2018 10:48
Annotation Publication/2018813/5 (2018/12/19-08.26.19) (archived)   Ok, thanks. I haven't changed the προς yet (please see on 36). November 18, 2018 10:56
Annotation Publication/2018813/6 (2018/12/19-08.26.19) (archived)   Ok, thanks. November 18, 2018 10:56
Annotation Publication/2018813/3 (2018/12/19-08.26.19) (archived)   Thank you. I haven't changed προς το θειον yet ; please see comment on 36 standard. November 18, 2018 11:03
Annotation Publication/2018813/4 (2018/12/19-08.26.19) (archived)   Ok; please cf. stand and 36. November 18, 2018 11:05
Annotation Publication/2018115/34 (submitted)   UPZ 1.56 stand. Hi! There are a few issues with this text. I have made the following changes in the standard, and suggested them in PN: 1-11 Changed Ἀχαμανρῆτι to Ἀχαμανρῆτος (Wilcken writes in his editorial commentary, p. 282: "Dass hier Ἀχαμανρῆτι statt Ἀχαμανρῆτος gesagt ist, entspricht der Gleichgültigkeit des Ptolemaios gegenüber den Kasus.") 7-5: Changed Πετοβάστιος to Πετοβάστις and Σομπατοῦ to Σομπατοῦς. (Wilcken, ibid.: "Korrekt müsste es Πετοβάστις heißen. Σομπατοῦ ist wohl die nicht gräzisierte Form. Griechisch wäre es Σομπατοῦς, οῦτος.") 11-3: surely αρταβης should not be in the genitive? Should I change it? And what to do with sentence 14? November 20, 2018 14:57
Annotation Publication/2018115/35 (submitted)   UPZ 1.56 orig. Please see comments on the standard. In sentence 8, I changed ἀ to ἀSU, and in PN suggested changing <:ἀ<πέχουσι>|reg|ἀ:> to ἀ<πέχουσι>. Is this ok? November 20, 2018 14:59
Annotation Publication/2018813/8 (2018/12/19-08.26.19) (archived)   Thanks! (Wonder how come I missed διδυμων...) Is it ok like this? November 21, 2018 20:59
Annotation Publication/2018812/1 (submitted)   Thanks; here. But what to do with προς το θειον? November 21, 2018 21:40
Annotation Publication/2018101/3 (submitted)   UPZ 1.50 stand. Hi! This is very problematic. I'm not really sure if της ημερας in sentence 4 can be taken as ATR to the breads. In addition: For 3-8 in the original there is ἱερεῶν, which the editor has interpreted as standing for the temples; but is it feasible that Apollonios might have had in his mind the priests rather than temples while writing this word? (I guess we'll never know for sure what he intended to write and what the writer of the original which he was copying originally had in mind...) More importantly, also in sentence 3, there is διαλυόμεναι in the standard but διαλυωμεν καὶ in the original; I have treebanked them differently -- I'm not sure this is the best solution --, but what kind of element should I insert in the standard for the number of tokens to match? (SR?) In addition, in sentence 4, I have separated Ψινταῆν and τὸν from each other (it stood Ψινταῆντὸν). November 22, 2018 18:09
Annotation Publication/2018101/4 (submitted)   UPZ 1.50 orig. Please see comments on stand. In sentence 4, should I rather leave the imperfectly preserved words open to interpretation? November 22, 2018 18:10
Annotation Publication/2018922/3 (submitted)   UPZ 1.21 hand 1 stand. Hi! The first sentence is very complex, I may well have structured something wrong. I’m not sure of the significance of 1-85 ἐξενίαυτον, but Wilcken seems to interpret is as adverbial (p. 206, note on line 12). What should be done with sentence 3? 11-3 ἤδη : is this ADV or AuxY, and should it depend on αἰτεῖν or the PRED? 11-15 ὧν : what does this stand for? November 26, 2018 11:10
Annotation Publication/2018922/4 (submitted)   UPZ 1.21 hand 1 orig. Please see comments on the standard. The original is poorly preserved. November 26, 2018 11:11
Annotation Publication/20181115/2 (2019/10/08-03.24.46) (archived)   UPZ 1.80 stand. Hi! I'm afraid with this text I've had to rely very much on mere guesswork. Perhaps you are able to make more sense of it? November 27, 2018 13:42
Annotation Publication/20181115/3 (2019/10/08-03.24.27) (archived)   UPZ 1.80 orig. Please see comments on the standard. November 27, 2018 13:42
Annotation Publication/2018102/17 (submitted)   UPZ 1.52 stand. Please note that the αλλ' η remains unresolved, in addition to which there are several issues (please see comments below). November 28, 2018 18:20
Annotation Publication/2018102/16 (submitted)   UPZ 1.52 orig. Cf. standard. November 28, 2018 18:20
Annotation Publication/2018102/18 (submitted)   UPZ 1.53 stand. Please see comments below and those on 52. November 28, 2018 19:50
Annotation Publication/2018102/19 (submitted)   Please see also comments on standard and on 52. November 28, 2018 19:51
Annotation Publication/2018115/30 (submitted)   UPZ 1.54 stand. Hi! This comes with many unclarities, notably the αλλ' η structure. Please see comments below. November 29, 2018 13:45
Annotation Publication/2018115/31 (submitted)   UPZ 1.54 orig. Cf. comments on standard and below. November 29, 2018 13:46
Annotation Publication/20181023/8 (submitted)   UPZ 1.55 hand 1 stand. This text presents αλλ' η and other issues. Please cf. UPZ 1.52-54. November 29, 2018 14:23
Annotation Publication/20181023/9 (submitted)   UPZ 1.55 hand 1 orig. Cf. standard. November 29, 2018 14:23
Annotation Publication/20181112/16 (submitted)   UPZ 1.79 stand. Hi! This is a fascinating text. There is, however, a plethora of questions I have posted in the comments. December 02, 2018 12:27
Annotation Publication/20181112/17 (submitted)   UPZ 1.79 orig. Please see comments on the standard and those here. December 02, 2018 12:28
Annotation Publication/2018816/1 (2018/12/23-11.16.27) (archived)   Thanks; here. December 02, 2018 14:09
Annotation Publication/2018816/2 (2018/12/23-11.16.27) (archived)   Ok, thanks. December 02, 2018 14:10
Annotation Publication/2018102/14 (submitted)   UPZ 1.51 stand. Hi! This is really tough. Sentence 2, especially, is difficult to treebank in a satisfying way. December 03, 2018 11:21
Annotation Publication/2018102/15 (submitted)   UPZ 1.51 orig. Please see comments on standard and here. December 03, 2018 11:21
Annotation Publication/2018102/14 (submitted)   I made a few more changes, on which we discussed today. I couldn't find φριτοβ / φεριτοβ / φριτβ / φριτωβ in TLG. December 03, 2018 15:48
Annotation Publication/2018102/15 (submitted)   - December 03, 2018 15:48
Annotation Publication/20181112/14 (submitted)   UPZ 1.78 stand. Hi! This interesting dream description comes with many questions. I've intentionally left some sentences unfinished in the standard, because in my view, the critical editing of the text is not finished. There are at least 12 changes I would like to suggest (also in papyri.info) -- please see comments. December 05, 2018 14:19
Annotation Publication/20181112/15 (submitted)   UPZ 1.78 orig. Please see comments here and on the standard. Should the first sentence be annotated in accordance with the standard? December 05, 2018 14:20
Annotation Publication/2018816/8 (submitted)   UPZ 1.14 hand 1 stand. Hi! I'm finally submitting this lengthy text. There are some sentences that will not open up to me, specifically sentences 7, 9, and 24. It also took a while to get my head around 25, and I'm not quite certain I still got it right. Please see the comments. December 06, 2018 15:57
Annotation Publication/2018816/9 (submitted)   UPZ 1.14 hand 1 orig. Please see comments here and on the standard. December 06, 2018 15:57
Annotation Publication/2018926/5 (submitted)   UPZ 1.20 hand 1 stand. Hi! I consider annotating sentence 4 as the first of my Heraclean Labours. The thought is, at times, quite untraceable to me, at least. I'm afraid I'm not making very much sense out of sentences 2 and 3 either, so if somebody is able to clarify them, I'm glad. December 16, 2018 15:21
Annotation Publication/2018926/6 (submitted)   UPZ 1.20 hand 1 orig. Please see comments on both layers. December 16, 2018 15:21
Annotation Publication/20181219/14 (editing)   P.Mich.13.670 hand 3 stand. Hi! This is the NEW VERSION, i.e., with recent changes in papyri.info. Please delete the OLD VERSION which I submitted earlier! December 20, 2018 13:19
Annotation Publication/20181219/15 (editing)   P.Mich.13.670 hand 3 orig, NEW VERSIN. Please see comments on standard. December 20, 2018 13:19
Annotation Publication/20181219/16 (editing)   p.mich.13.670_hand_4_stand. NEW VERSION. Please see on hand 3 stand. December 20, 2018 13:32
Annotation Publication/20181219/17 (editing)   p.mich.13.670_hand_4_orig. NEW VERSION. Please see comments on standard. December 20, 2018 13:32
Annotation Publication/20181219/18 (submitted)   p.mich.13.670_hand_5_stand. NEW VERSION. Please see comments on hand 3 stand. December 20, 2018 13:42
Annotation Publication/20181219/19 (submitted)   p.mich.13.670_hand_5_orig. NEW VERSION. Please see comments on standard. December 20, 2018 13:42
Annotation Publication/20181219/12 (submitted)   p.mich.13.670_hand_2_stand. NEW VERSION. Please see on hand 3 stand. December 20, 2018 13:49
Annotation Publication/20181219/13 (submitted)   p.mich.13.670_hand_2_orig. NEW VERSION. Please see on hand 3 stand. December 20, 2018 13:50
Annotation Publication/20181219/11 (submitted)   P. Mich. 13.670 hand 1 orig. This is somewhat fragmentary. P. Michael. 44 seems to preserve some of the formulae more compeletely. Cf. also P. Michael 43. December 23, 2018 11:09
Annotation Publication/20181219/10 (submitted)   P. Mich. 13.670 hand 1 stand. I have some trouble with interpreting certain elements. Please see comments. December 23, 2018 11:11
Annotation Publication/20181218/13 (submitted)   UPZ 1.58 stand. Hi! There are, apparently, several hands in this text, but no hand shift is marked. In addition, there are many open questions: please see comments. December 27, 2018 20:49
Annotation Publication/20181218/14 (submitted)   UPZ 1.58 orig. Please see comments on the standard. December 27, 2018 20:50
Annotation Publication/20181124/16 (2019/07/28-15.42.07) (archived)   UPZ 1.111 stand. December 29, 2018 09:34
Annotation Publication/20181124/17 (2019/07/28-15.42.03) (archived)   UPZ 1.111 orig.Please see comments also on the standard. December 29, 2018 09:34
Annotation Publication/20181112/12 (submitted)   UPZ 1.76 stand. Sorry, I'm not making much sense out of this. I'm suggesting a translation as follows, but it might be very far from what the writer had in mind: "Know that since the 25th Menon travels around Trikomia […]ing (act. participle?) a nosebag. I point him out to someone / Let him point himself out to someone (?). I have sold the booty (or cattle ?) and if they have something to carry off in the deposit. Farewell." December 29, 2018 10:24
Annotation Publication/20181112/13 (submitted)   UPZ 1.76 orig. December 29, 2018 10:24
Annotation Publication/2018922/7 (2019/02/25-15.30.38) (archived)   Thanks! This does make more sense. February 09, 2019 12:37
Annotation Publication/2018922/8 (2019/02/25-15.30.34) (archived)   Thanks. February 09, 2019 12:37
Annotation Publication/2018714/2 (submitted)   Thanks, please see comment on standard! July 28, 2019 15:06
Annotation Publication/2018714/1 (submitted)   Hi! Thank you. I've made the change, but please note the comment. July 28, 2019 15:06
Annotation Publication/2018926/13 (2019/09/05-13.45.40) (archived)   Quite, thanks! July 28, 2019 15:14
Annotation Publication/2018926/14 (2019/09/05-13.45.46) (archived)   Cheers. July 28, 2019 15:14
Annotation Publication/201882/1 (submitted)   Thanks! Here with corrections. July 28, 2019 16:04
Annotation Publication/201882/2 (submitted)   Thanks; here with corrections. July 28, 2019 16:11
Annotation Publication/2018621/1 (submitted)   Thanks. I'm not yet good at distinguishing when ExD is preferable to PRED. In sentence 2, omitting the two _COs seems logical, although in previously committed papyri I think I've used it with everything that goes under a coordinator. July 28, 2019 23:34
Annotation Publication/2018621/2 (submitted)   Thanks; here. July 28, 2019 23:35
Annotation Publication/2018812/2 (editing)   Hi, thanks, and please see comments. I submitted the standard last November. I seem to have written in the comments to it about the King and Queen in sentence 2 as follows: "Oh, I forgot the King and Queen in sentence two -- should I change them to ADV, as in 34? (Are they not passive agents, though?)" Didn't we discuss this structure last year? I wonder we might have decided. July 28, 2019 23:53
Annotation Publication/20181112/12 (submitted)   Thanks! Yes, there are still some inclarities; I hope I got all the corrections right, but please see the comments. July 29, 2019 15:25
Annotation Publication/20181112/13 (submitted)   Thanks! July 29, 2019 15:26
Annotation Publication/20181115/2 (2019/10/08-03.24.46) (archived)   Thanks! I divided sentece 5. July 29, 2019 15:51
Annotation Publication/20181115/3 (2019/10/08-03.24.27) (archived)   Thanks; here. July 29, 2019 15:52
Annotation Publication/20181115/2 (2019/10/08-03.24.46) (archived)   (Forgot the δε in sentence 5.) July 29, 2019 15:55
Annotation Publication/20181115/3 (2019/10/08-03.24.27) (archived)   Please see comment on standard. July 29, 2019 15:55
Annotation Publication/2019225/12 (editing)   UPZ 1.110 hand 2b stand. July 29, 2019 16:06
Annotation Publication/2019225/13 (editing)   UPZ 1.110 hand 2b orig. July 29, 2019 16:06
Annotation Publication/20181112/12 (submitted)   Thanks! I've imported this to PapyGreek as it is now. October 07, 2019 13:25
Annotation Publication/20181112/13 (submitted)   Thanks! I've imported this to PapyGreek as it is now. October 07, 2019 13:26
Annotation Publication/2018714/1 (submitted)   Kiitos! Olin huolimaton. Tein muutaman lisämuutoksen, ja importtaan nyt PapyGreekiin tällaisena. October 07, 2019 13:38
Annotation Publication/2018714/2 (submitted)   Kiitos! October 07, 2019 13:38
Annotation Publication/201882/1 (submitted)   Thanks! Yes, now it seems more understandable -- but please make sure I got it right, either here or in PapyGreek, where I am importing this now as it is. I also made another small change in sentence 6. October 08, 2019 03:01
Annotation Publication/201882/2 (submitted)   Thanks! October 08, 2019 03:02
Annotation Publication/201882/1 (submitted)   Thanks; it is confusing, but I think the elliptical PRED in sentence 6 seems credible. November 04, 2019 06:29
Annotation Publication/201882/2 (submitted)   Thanks! Sorry, I earlier missed the comment on sentence 3. November 04, 2019 06:30
Annotation Publication/201882/1 (submitted)   Cheers; I hope I got all. November 05, 2019 20:47
Annotation Publication/201882/2 (submitted)   Thanks! November 05, 2019 20:48
Annotation Publication/201882/1 (submitted)   I forgot to delete the 3rd elliptical element in sentece 6. November 05, 2019 20:50
Annotation Publication/201882/2 (submitted)   Elliptical token deleted. November 05, 2019 20:51
Annotation Publication/2018714/1 (submitted)   Thanks. November 05, 2019 20:52
Annotation Publication/2018714/2 (submitted)   Thanks. November 05, 2019 20:53