The Demopædia Encyclopedia on Population is under heavy modernization and maintenance. Outputs could look bizarre, sorry for the temporary inconvenience

Multilingual Demographic Dictionary, second unified edition, English volume

Difference between revisions of "Talk:21"

Multilingual Demographic Dictionary, second unified edition, English vol.
Jump to: navigation, search
m (minor structure changes)
(215-12 (To be checked))
Line 69: Line 69:
 
: To state that "family re-constitution makes use of family reconstitution forms" seemed tautological. I deleted the 2nd occurrence of "reconstitution". [[User:Patrick HEUVELINE|Patrick HEUVELINE]] ([[User talk:Patrick HEUVELINE|talk]]) 13:07, 20 July 2017 (CEST)
 
: To state that "family re-constitution makes use of family reconstitution forms" seemed tautological. I deleted the 2nd occurrence of "reconstitution". [[User:Patrick HEUVELINE|Patrick HEUVELINE]] ([[User talk:Patrick HEUVELINE|talk]]) 13:07, 20 July 2017 (CEST)
  
= 215-12 (To be checked) =
+
= 215-12 (double checked) =
 
* Genealogies in USA were not restricted to upper classes. Maybe could say 'characteristics of the families included' or some such. --[[User:Stan BECKER|Stan BECKER]] 17:06, 29 September 2014 (CEST)
 
* Genealogies in USA were not restricted to upper classes. Maybe could say 'characteristics of the families included' or some such. --[[User:Stan BECKER|Stan BECKER]] 17:06, 29 September 2014 (CEST)
 
: I think the person who drafted this in French had in mind existing written genealogies going back centuries. Those were likely to pertain only to nobility or upper classes. The new end of the sentence ("families included") sounds odd to me. I would suggest "selected families" to indicate that there is a "selection bias" in the types of family that might be covered by such genealogies. [[User:Patrick HEUVELINE|Patrick HEUVELINE]] ([[User talk:Patrick HEUVELINE|talk]]) 14:09, 20 July 2017 (CEST)
 
: I think the person who drafted this in French had in mind existing written genealogies going back centuries. Those were likely to pertain only to nobility or upper classes. The new end of the sentence ("families included") sounds odd to me. I would suggest "selected families" to indicate that there is a "selection bias" in the types of family that might be covered by such genealogies. [[User:Patrick HEUVELINE|Patrick HEUVELINE]] ([[User talk:Patrick HEUVELINE|talk]]) 14:09, 20 July 2017 (CEST)
 +
:: nice. Double checked.--[[User:Nicolas Brouard|Nicolas Brouard]] ([[User talk:Nicolas Brouard|talk]]) 11:47, 21 July 2017 (CEST)

Revision as of 10:47, 21 July 2017




210-5 (Checked)

  • Are you sure about this. I thought census tract was the lowest unit and enumeration district was above that, not below???--Stan BECKER 16:37, 29 September 2014 (CEST)
  • the sentence was unchanged since the first edition. I can't answer.--Nicolas Brouard 16:40, 29 September 2014 (CEST)
I can't answer either, but my impression is the same as Stan's. Patrick HEUVELINE (talk) 11:13, 20 July 2017 (CEST)

211-4 (Checked)

  • del "Church". Religious groups. Quakers and other non-conformists for example kept registers but are not a "Church". Done.--Stan BECKER 16:49, 29 September 2014 (CEST)
I see Stan's point: the "Church" wasn't the only one to keep registers. I'm not sure those are called "parish registers" though (I'm fairly ignorant on that point: do Quakers have parishs?). To go along Stan's suggestion, I also deleted "parish" before "registers". Patrick HEUVELINE (talk) 11:25, 20 July 2017 (CEST)

213-3 (checked)

Somewhat antiquated usage now.--Stan BECKER 16:53, 29 September 2014 (CEST)

I agree, but I don't think any change is necessary. Patrick HEUVELINE (talk) 11:29, 20 July 2017 (CEST)

214-1 (checked)

  • add "close" equivalents since baptism is not at same time as birth necessarily nor is burial coincident with death.--Stan BECKER 16:57, 29 September 2014 (CEST)
Agreed, "close" added. Patrick HEUVELINE (talk) 11:33, 20 July 2017 (CEST)


214-5 (To be checked)

chrisoms is a single term for the early baptism and the dead child. L. Henry distinguished two terms: pour les enfants ondoyés 4 à la maison et morts avant le baptême, on n’a qu’un acte de sépulture; on appelle ces enfants des ondoyés décédés 5.--Nicolas Brouard 14:29, 29 December 2009 (UTC)
  • The Trilingual Demographic Dictionary Arabic-English-French of 1988 uses baptized privately.--Nicolas Brouard 19:51, 11 June 2012 (CEST)
For chrisoms 5, privately baptized infants 4★ who die at home prior to a formal church ceremony, only the burial record is available. Nominal lists contain information either on a portion of the population or more rarely on the whole population. --Nicolas Brouard 09:42, 2 July 2013 (CEST)
My understanding is that "Chrisoms" refers to children who die within one month of having been baptized. If this is so, the term does NOT refer to privately baptized children who die before a formal Church baptism and it is not correct to state that those only have a burial record. I suggest we delete "Chrisoms," from this sentence. Patrick HEUVELINE (talk) 11:57, 20 July 2017 (CEST)
A child could get a summary baptism (see http://www.larousse.fr/dictionnaires/francais-anglais/ondoiement/55664) but not die. If death occured, we get only one information instead of two. Peter Laslett suggests that chrisom or chrissom was used for children who died before they could be baptised - in either case they were buried wrapped in the cloth used for, or intended for their baptism. (see https://www.lostcousins.com/newsletters2/midjul15news.htm#Chrisom). Instead of privately baptized, we could say summary baptized? Chrisom has been already translated in many languages (see the above list) --Nicolas Brouard (talk)

214-6 7 8 9 (To be checked)

  • Error in the numerotation. Original text was:
They include the a status animarum 7which are nominal lists of all parishioners, lists of communicants 8 and confirmation lists 9, as well as administrative and fiscal documents such as hearth tax lists 10, taxation rolls 11 and military conscription lists 11.
And in comparison with the French:
on trouve ainsi : les états des âmes 6 ou status animarum 6, listes nominatives de tous les paroissiens, les listes de communiants 7, les listes de confirmation 8, puis, dans le domaine administratif ou fiscal, les listes de feux 9, les rôles d’imposition 10 et, dans le domaine militaire, les listes de conscription 11.
And thus I modified the English numerotation (as well as for other English dependent languages (please check my changes Russian, Chinese, Japanese etc.) to:
They include the a status animarum 6which are nominal lists of all parishioners, lists of communicants 7 and confirmation lists 8, as well as administrative and fiscal documents such as hearth tax lists 9, taxation rolls 10 and military conscription lists 11.--Nicolas Brouard 14:29, 29 December 2009 (UTC)

215-3 (Double checked)

  • this too is very dated. Maybe not needed or something more generic instead?
I think if we used "form" instead of "slip". It seems to be to cover both the physical cards and the electronic form in a software. Patrick HEUVELINE (talk) 12:03, 20 July 2017 (CEST)
fine (I changed the index entries accordingly slip -> form, for the index of the printed book) --Nicolas Brouard (talk) 10:46, 21 July 2017 (CEST)
  • The meaning of "subjects" in "subjects of record" to translate "sujet de l'acte" didn't seem right. I just modified as "persons of record". Patrick HEUVELINE (talk) 13:09, 20 July 2017 (CEST)
You are right. Double checked --Nicolas Brouard (talk) 10:46, 21 July 2017 (CEST)

215-9 (To be checked)

and 10. They have been suppressed from the English edition. Louis Henry defined names for the transcription of summary: des relevés anonymes 9 ou des relevés nominatifs 10 , plus succincts, but these are not crucial terminology (I think).--Nicolas Brouard 14:29, 29 December 2009 (UTC)
  • The Trilingual Demographic Dictionary Arabic-English-French of 1988 uses nominal roll* (215-10) and anonymous statement (215-9).--Nicolas Brouard 19:48, 11 June 2012 (CEST)
I don't see why we would use a different term for nominal "rolls" and anonymous "statements" since they refer to the same object, one with names, the other one without. I would use "rolls" rather than "statements" for both. Patrick HEUVELINE (talk) 12:57, 20 July 2017 (CEST)
Other anonymous statements 9★, nominal rolls 10★ and transcription forms 11 are also used for summary extraction of the data, either with or without the names of the subjects.--Nicolas Brouard 10:07, 2 July 2013 (CEST)
Since we use "forms" earlier (in the sense of "fiches"), I would use a different term here. I think "sheet" as a translation of "feuille" works in this context. Patrick HEUVELINE (talk) 12:57, 20 July 2017 (CEST)
To state that "family re-constitution makes use of family reconstitution forms" seemed tautological. I deleted the 2nd occurrence of "reconstitution". Patrick HEUVELINE (talk) 13:07, 20 July 2017 (CEST)

215-12 (double checked)

  • Genealogies in USA were not restricted to upper classes. Maybe could say 'characteristics of the families included' or some such. --Stan BECKER 17:06, 29 September 2014 (CEST)
I think the person who drafted this in French had in mind existing written genealogies going back centuries. Those were likely to pertain only to nobility or upper classes. The new end of the sentence ("families included") sounds odd to me. I would suggest "selected families" to indicate that there is a "selection bias" in the types of family that might be covered by such genealogies. Patrick HEUVELINE (talk) 14:09, 20 July 2017 (CEST)
nice. Double checked.--Nicolas Brouard (talk) 11:47, 21 July 2017 (CEST)