Re: Use of <q> within <rs>

These, on the other hand, do seem more persuasively <quote>s. Maybe we 
do need a special element for phrase level quotations (though that would 
not help with the Dante example). That is, assuming it's actually useful 
to mark this lengthy periphrasis as a single unit, all the way from 
"Celui" to "stars".  I'll bet there are examples where a phrase like 
this is discontinuous too. So maybe we need to tighten up the field of 
application for <rs> a bit more clearly.


On 30/10/16 23:08, Robin Seguy wrote:
> I can see how, in the first case, <soCalled> makes sense — but isn't 
> it in many cases just a way to avoid giving a definite answer to the 
> question of the source of the quotation? (presumably the 
> pro-Burgundian party was more prone to use a derisive epithet); in 
> cases where a source is ascertained, like the second one, I can't see 
> what necessarily makes it a metalinguistic statement. The epithet may 
> be a misguiding case, but, in contrast, with greater syntactic 
> integration:
>
> "[...] la loi d'universelle finalité posée par Celui, dont Dante 
> écrit, en conclusion de son poème, que, par les sollicitations de son 
> amour, il attire à Lui le soleil, moteur de notre globe, et les autres 
> étoiles jetées par Lui dans l'espace."
>
> "[...] the law of universal finality laid down by Him of Whom Dante 
> writes at the conclusion of his poem :
> But yet the will rolled onward, like a wheel In even motion, by Love 
> impelled, That moves the sun in heaven and all the stars."
>
> Deciding that it is not a bona fides quotation seems to me to distort 
> the notion of quotation itself.
>
>
>
>
> On Sun, Oct 30, 2016 at 5:36 PM, Lou Burnard 
> <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> 
> wrote:
>
>     Would <soCalled> or <mentioned> not be more suitable for these
>     examples?
>