Publishers face many options when making decisions about publishing. These choices have far-reaching implications as to how the material is received and consumed by the public. In addition, it also has implication on what kind of historical artifact is created for future generations of researchers. The two main forms of editing are documentary editing and critical editing. Williams and Abbott note that documentary editing aims to reproduce a manuscript or printed text as historical artifact (74). On the other hand, they state that critical editing constructs a text that may incorporate readings from several documentary text and may include editorial emendations (78). This is of importance because the author’s intention may change over time. The choice an editor makes in determining the authors intention is itself influence by present context. Who decides at what particular juncture of the authors process Intention at a particular historical moment. What and who influences these decisions has long lasting implications. Historical – critical editing primarily Germany complete textual history. Something that may seem trivial could have long lasting implications. For example, the choice of spelling. Williams and Abbott note editors have a choice of using old-spelling, regularized or modern spelling (103). The choice of spelling has influence on who reads the book and how it is received by readers. As they note this choice, can impede or advance research.

Williams and Abbott note that new technology in the forms of computers and apparatus such as the Hinman collator or the Lindstrad camparator has transformed how research in text analysis is conducted. This not only facilitated the process of textual analysis but it has also opened this research to a greater audience. This medium has greatly influenced how electronic research of text is conducted. This facilitates ease and cost of research in that scholars do not have to travel various libraries extensively as they did in the past. They raise the critical point that coding is interpretive and as such, it is subjective to the interpretation of the editor (88). As such, an over reliance of digital analysis can lead the continued perspective of programmers and coders who’s decisions will have a wide and long lasting influence in determining what directions researchers take.

This entry is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International license.