Common Knowledge: Epigraph confusion

Hi!

Today I came across a number of places where the Common Knowledge epigraph info in the English section was in Dutch, and completely incorrect.

This made me have a look around and I noticed that some are adding epigraphs to Common Knowledge without having understood what an epigraph is. What is being added are short summaries or blurbs, and those are not epigraphs.

To confuse thing even more: when there is no epitaph in English (not all works have them), one will automatically be picked from another language, so now the Dutch blurbs are trickling through and showing up in the English epigraph section.

I wanted to contact the people directly, but asked about it first on the CK forum where the suggestion came up about posting here. The original discussion is on this thread.

There appears to be some confusion about what an epigraph is, and we are wondering if the Dutch translation is muddying the matters by not calling it "epigraaf" (people might then look it up if they are unsure, instead of guessing).

I don't know if there is a way of going back and changing all the entries without having to do each and every one manually ... I hope so.

>1 Ephemeralda:

I presume you didn't mean to switch from epigraphy to epitaph in there :)

You can change the Dutch translation. Click the "translate" link at the top right. ('Vertaal!')

>2 timspalding:

Haha ... Thanks, Tim, and no, I did not mean to write "epitaph".

I would love for someone to change the translation, but since I speak no Dutch I don't consider myself qualified.

The problem is that blurbs are added in the epigraph section (and then trickle through to the English). We (on the initial thread) were wondering if perhaps the Dutch LT wouldn't be clearer if the literary term "epigraaf" was used.

Now, how to go about changing all those entries ... I do not know.

I think I spot the confusion. There are two words in Dutch at the moment. One of which can be interpreted as 'blurb' (opschrift). The other one, 'motto', is exactly the right word. It would be strange to turn it in to something much more obscure, like epigraaf.
I will see if I can find some of the 'blurb' and change it. If you have directions...

>4 bookmomo:

As the literary term "epigraaf" exists, could it not be used instead of "opschrift" (which seems to cause the blurb-confusion) with "motto": "epigraaf/motto"?

I am assuming the word "motto" has the same meaning in Dutch as in German, unlike the English word "motto" which would not work at all.

If you think the term is too obscure, please know that the English literary term "epigraph" is not one that is known by everyone either, but I think that fact in itself helps ensure that people look it up if they don't know what it means. If an "everyday word" is used instead, the risk of misinterpretation is surely greater?

'Epigraaf' exists in Dutch, but it only describes an inscription on a monument on headstone. I've checked Van Dale's Dutch dictionary, and they do not give another meaning than the inscription on a monument or headstone. Also, at school and at university I was taught to use the Dutch word 'motto' when talking about what in English would be called an 'epigraph'. I agree with bookmomo, the right translations is 'motto', not 'epigraaf'. Using that word would 'epigraaf' cause more confusion.

Great!

If "motto" is the term that is used for epigraph, then surely that is the word to use.

There must be a reason why blurbs are being entered. Is there a good description in place? When pressing the "edit pencil" for entering the epigraph, the English description reads:

"The work's epigraph, "a phrase, quotation, or poem that is set at the beginning of a document or component."

Is there a good description in Dutch?

Can someone please put a message on this forum in Dutch about what needs to go in the epigraph box? This should preferably be worded in such a way that those who have been doing it for a while also read it and double check their own habits.

Now, how to attack all those erroneous entries?

The confusion in Dutch might have come from the use of the word 'opschrift', which people may have interpreted as 'written on the cover'.
The Dutch explanation of motto seems clear to me.

However, when checking for unwanted uses of the epigraph section and blurb section, I found some in German too. Maybe this isn't a Dutch problem only.

The explanation of 'blurb', for that matter, seems much more confusing to me, both in Dutch and in English. I found a lot of unwanted uses there, from all sources (English, Dutch, German, etc.).