Lower-Case Sentence Starts to Capitals in EEBO-TCP/Project Puritas Texts

Status
Not open for further replies.

davejonescue

Puritan Board Junior
Hello all. Was searching tonight to see if there was a way to automatically change the lower-case beginnings of sentences to capitals, without having to do so manually. Many Puritan writings will start a new sentence with a lower-case after a "?" and "!" Looking around, I found a resolution. Thought this would be useful for anybody who may want to edit such texts, as it would save you the step of changing them manually. For instance, in this work, it saved me roughly 400 manual changes.

These are the steps:

Go to Find & Replace.
Find: (\?) [a-z] Wildcard Selected
Then, Click on Find, to take you to the Advanced Find Box.
From there, Search in Main Document.
Close out of the Diagram Box.
You then hit Shift+F3

This will automatically change all of the selected lower-case beginnings of a sentence to a capital, with a single key-stroke. If you want to find the lower-cases that follow a "!" then simply change out (\?) for (\!) in the Find. As a hint, at least the way I would do it, is first run a:

Find: (\?) [a-z] Wildcard
Replace: Highlight

This way you can see where in the text has been changed while you edit.


shift F3.jpg

Found in a conversation here: https://americaneditor.wordpress.co...rd-finding-and-replacing-upper-and-lowercase/

Thinking about it, since I posted this, here are some more useful Find&Replace Tricks I use specifically for these texts.

1. Find: ^p^p
Replace: ^p
This is for properly spacing copy & pasted HTML’s into Word.

2. Find: & (Match Case) (Space before and after the &)
Replace: and (Highlight) (Space before and after the and)
This is for replacing & with and, but not changing &c.

3. Find: (whatever non-spelling error there is)
Replace: Highlight (to preferred color)
This will Highlight all of the same-like errors, so that you can easily view them in the text.

4. Find: ([0-9]).([0-9]) (Wild Card)
Replace: \1:\2 (Highlight)
This will change Scripture rendering from Luk. 12.3, to Luk. 12:3. If there is a space between the chapter, period and verse; then put a space between ([0-9]). ([0-9]) in the Find Box and run the same Replace. Doing this may result in Luk. 1:12:13:!4:!5. To remedy this, before running, go to Find and search for ([0-9]).([0-9]).([0-9]) and separate them manually with a comma by automatically going to them using the Up and Down arrows..

5. Find: ([0-9]). ([a-z]) (Wild Card)
Replace: 1\, \2 (Highlight)
This will change periods after Scripture reference, which are mid-sentence, to commas, so it will now look like “Luk. 12:3, and they went” instead of “Luk. 12:3. and they went” Notice the space after the period and the comma in the Find and Replace.

6. Find: (\?) ([a-z]) (Wild Card)
Replace: \1 \2 (Highlight)
This will Highlight all the lowercase sentence starts after a question and exclamation mark. Just switch out the question for an exclamation mark to do the latter.

7. Find: <[A-Z] (Wild Card)
Replace: Highlight
This will Highlight all of the Capital Letters. Especially dealing with Puritan Texts, if you desire not to have random capitalized words mid-sentence, this will help you catch them.
 
Last edited:
Use ChatGPT.
No thanks. Not a fan of AI in its current form. Too many delusions, hallucinations, and inconsistencies. Can ask it the same question 5 times and get 5 different answers. Dont trust it. Maybe in 10-20 years.

 
Last edited:
Well you are not asking a question really when you tell them to change this or that...
why don't you paste a sample text here and I will show you the result.
 
Well you are not asking a question really when you tell them to change this or that...
why don't you paste a sample text here and I will show you the result.
I appreciate the offer. But I will pass. Doing it the way I am doing at the moment, means all steps have been manually imputed; from the hand-transcription of TCP from facsimile to text, from the manually generated word-replacement list to make the corrections in Project Puritas, to the human editing post-Project Puritas corrections to final ePublication. I am just not comfortable at the moment using ChatGPT to generate "clean-texts." Again, thank you for the recommendation, and I am not ruling out one day AI will not be able to do this. But for right now, at this moment, it is too untrustworthy for me to utilize in this process.
 
I appreciate the offer. But I will pass. Doing it the way I am doing at the moment, means all steps have been manually imputed; from the hand-transcription of TCP from facsimile to text, from the manually generated word-replacement list to make the corrections in Project Puritas, to the human editing post-Project Puritas corrections to final ePublication. I am just not comfortable at the moment using ChatGPT to generate "clean-texts." Again, thank you for the recommendation, and I am not ruling out one day AI will not be able to do this. But for right now, at this moment, it is too untrustworthy for me to utilize in this process.
Nevertheless, I would appreciate if you could paste the text so that I can see whether I was wrong in recommending AI for a problem like this.
 
Nevertheless, I would appreciate if you could paste the text so that I can see whether I was wrong in recommending AI for a problem like this.



User


Can you change all sentences that begin with lower case to upper case in the following text.

"Secondly, are Ministers Angels? then they must be holy; ye know the Angels are holy: When the Son of man shall come in his glory, and all his holy Angels with him, Matth. 25. 31. They are holy all of them: so should the Ministers be holy; otherwise they may be Angels indeed, but they are evil angels, angels of darkness; they are Devils if they be not holy. Every ignorant, graceless, and unconscionable Minister is ready to press the dignity of his calling, and what an honorable office he hath; but he never considers what a Minister then he must be. If we be Angels, brethren, why then as we like this honorable Title, we must have a care to be holy, or else, I say, we are Devils. Those Angels that are not holy, are Devils. Nay, our very calling supposes us to be holy, Let thy Urim and thy Thummim be with thy holy one, Deut. 33. 8. so that our very calling will testify against us, if we be not holy: We of all men should labor to be holy; What, a Minister, and yet a drunkard? a Minister, and yet a whoremonger? a Minister, and yet without the fear of God? a Minister, and yet have a dead heart? O consider what God says, What hast thou to do to declare my statutes, or that thou shouldst take my covenant within thy mouth, seeing thou hatest instruction, and hast cast my words behind thee? Psal. 50. 16, 17. With what face can we here stand in a Pulpit, and preach against sin, and teach our hearers to make conscience of all their ways, and denounce the judgments of God against them that do evil, if we that condemn another do the same things or as bad? How inexcusable are we, if we can preach the straitness of heavens gate, and the narrowness of the way, and the strictness of the account the people shall be forced to give at the last day, and lay heavy burdens on other men's shoulders, and we ourselves not touch them with one of our fingers? Teach precisely, and live loosely, teach graciously, and walk broadly? This is gross hypocrisy; act zeal and goodness in the Pulpit, and be heartless and luke-warm in our private duties unto God. "


"SECONDLY, ARE MINISTERS ANGELS? THEN THEY MUST BE HOLY; YE KNOW THE ANGELS ARE HOLY: WHEN THE SON OF MAN SHALL COME IN HIS GLORY, AND ALL HIS HOLY ANGELS WITH HIM, MATTH. 25. 31. THEY ARE HOLY ALL OF THEM: SO SHOULD THE MINISTERS BE HOLY; OTHERWISE THEY MAY BE ANGELS INDEED, BUT THEY ARE EVIL ANGELS, ANGELS OF DARKNESS; THEY ARE DEVILS IF THEY BE NOT HOLY. EVERY IGNORANT, GRACELESS, AND UNCONSCIONABLE MINISTER IS READY TO PRESS THE DIGNITY OF HIS CALLING, AND WHAT AN HONORABLE OFFICE HE HATH; BUT HE NEVER CONSIDERS WHAT A MINISTER THEN HE MUST BE. IF WE BE ANGELS, BRETHREN, WHY THEN AS WE LIKE THIS HONORABLE TITLE, WE MUST HAVE A CARE TO BE HOLY, OR ELSE, I SAY, WE ARE DEVILS. THOSE ANGELS THAT ARE NOT HOLY, ARE DEVILS. NAY, OUR VERY CALLING SUPPOSES US TO BE HOLY, LET THY URIM AND THY THUMMIM BE WITH THY HOLY ONE, DEUT. 33. 8. SO THAT OUR VERY CALLING WILL TESTIFY AGAINST US, IF WE BE NOT HOLY: WE OF ALL MEN SHOULD LABOR TO BE HOLY; WHAT, A MINISTER, AND YET A DRUNKARD? A MINISTER, AND YET A WHOREMONGER? A MINISTER, AND YET WITHOUT THE FEAR OF GOD? A MINISTER, AND YET HAVE A DEAD HEART? O CONSIDER WHAT GOD SAYS, WHAT HAST THOU TO DO TO DECLARE MY STATUTES, OR THAT THOU SHOULDEST TAKE MY COVENANT WITHIN THY MOUTH, SEEING THOU HATEST INSTRUCTION, AND HAST CAST MY WORDS BEHIND THEE? PSAL. 50. 16, 17. WITH WHAT FACE CAN WE HERE STAND IN A PULPIT, AND PREACH AGAINST SIN, AND TEACH OUR HEARERS TO MAKE CONSCIENCE OF ALL THEIR WAYS, AND DENOUNCE THE JUDGMENTS OF GOD AGAINST THEM THAT DO EVIL, IF WE THAT CONDEMN ANOTHER DO THE SAME THINGS OR AS BAD? HOW INEXCUSABLE ARE WE, IF WE CAN PREACH THE STRAITNESS OF HEAVENS GATE, AND THE NARROWNESS OF THE WAY, AND THE STRICTNESS OF THE ACCOUNT THE PEOPLE SHALL BE FORCED TO GIVE AT THE LAST DAY, AND LAY HEAVY BURDENS ON OTHER MEN'S SHOULDERS, AND WE OURSELVES NOT TOUCH THEM WITH ONE OF OUR FINGERS? TEACH PRECISELY, AND LIVE LOOSELY, TEACH GRACIOUSLY, AND WALK BROADLY? THIS IS GROSS HYPOCRISY; ACT ZEAL AND GOODNESS IN THE PULPIT, AND BE HEARTLESS AND LUKE-WARM IN OUR PRIVATE DUTIES UNTO GOD. "
 
This is what I did:

I pasted your 2nd text with the command "change this from upper case to proper cases"
"SECONDLY, ARE MINISTERS ANGELS? THEN THEY MUST BE HOLY; YE KNOW THE ANGELS ARE HOLY: WHEN THE SON OF MAN SHALL COME IN HIS GLORY, AND ALL HIS HOLY ANGELS WITH HIM, MATTH. 25. 31. THEY ARE HOLY ALL OF THEM: SO SHOULD THE MINISTERS BE HOLY; OTHERWISE THEY MAY BE ANGELS INDEED, BUT THEY ARE EVIL ANGELS, ANGELS OF DARKNESS; THEY ARE DEVILS IF THEY BE NOT HOLY. EVERY IGNORANT, GRACELESS, AND UNCONSCIONABLE MINISTER IS READY TO PRESS THE DIGNITY OF HIS CALLING, AND WHAT AN HONORABLE OFFICE HE HATH; BUT HE NEVER CONSIDERS WHAT A MINISTER THEN HE MUST BE. IF WE BE ANGELS, BRETHREN, WHY THEN AS WE LIKE THIS HONORABLE TITLE, WE MUST HAVE A CARE TO BE HOLY, OR ELSE, I SAY, WE ARE DEVILS. THOSE ANGELS THAT ARE NOT HOLY, ARE DEVILS. NAY, OUR VERY CALLING SUPPOSES US TO BE HOLY, LET THY URIM AND THY THUMMIM BE WITH THY HOLY ONE, DEUT. 33. 8. SO THAT OUR VERY CALLING WILL TESTIFY AGAINST US, IF WE BE NOT HOLY: WE OF ALL MEN SHOULD LABOR TO BE HOLY; WHAT, A MINISTER, AND YET A DRUNKARD? A MINISTER, AND YET A WHOREMONGER? A MINISTER, AND YET WITHOUT THE FEAR OF GOD? A MINISTER, AND YET HAVE A DEAD HEART? O CONSIDER WHAT GOD SAYS, WHAT HAST THOU TO DO TO DECLARE MY STATUTES, OR THAT THOU SHOULDEST TAKE MY COVENANT WITHIN THY MOUTH, SEEING THOU HATEST INSTRUCTION, AND HAST CAST MY WORDS BEHIND THEE? PSAL. 50. 16, 17. WITH WHAT FACE CAN WE HERE STAND IN A PULPIT, AND PREACH AGAINST SIN, AND TEACH OUR HEARERS TO MAKE CONSCIENCE OF ALL THEIR WAYS, AND DENOUNCE THE JUDGMENTS OF GOD AGAINST THEM THAT DO EVIL, IF WE THAT CONDEMN ANOTHER DO THE SAME THINGS OR AS BAD? HOW INEXCUSABLE ARE WE, IF WE CAN PREACH THE STRAITNESS OF HEAVENS GATE, AND THE NARROWNESS OF THE WAY, AND THE STRICTNESS OF THE ACCOUNT THE PEOPLE SHALL BE FORCED TO GIVE AT THE LAST DAY, AND LAY HEAVY BURDENS ON OTHER MEN'S SHOULDERS, AND WE OURSELVES NOT TOUCH THEM WITH ONE OF OUR FINGERS? TEACH PRECISELY, AND LIVE LOOSELY, TEACH GRACIOUSLY, AND WALK BROADLY? THIS IS GROSS HYPOCRISY; ACT ZEAL AND GOODNESS IN THE PULPIT, AND BE HEARTLESS AND LUKE-WARM IN OUR PRIVATE DUTIES UNTO GOD. "


ChatGPT
Secondly, are ministers angels? Then they must be holy; ye know the angels are holy: when the Son of Man shall come in His glory, and all His holy angels with Him, Matth. 25. 31. They are holy all of them: so should the ministers be holy; otherwise they may be angels indeed, but they are evil angels, angels of darkness; they are devils if they be not holy. Every ignorant, graceless, and unconscionable minister is ready to press the dignity of his calling, and what an honorable office he hath; but he never considers what a minister then he must be. If we be angels, brethren, why then as we like this honorable title, we must have a care to be holy, or else, I say, we are devils. Those angels that are not holy, are devils. Nay, our very calling supposes us to be holy, let thy Urim and thy Thummim be with thy Holy One, Deut. 33. 8. So that our very calling will testify against us, if we be not holy: we of all men should labor to be holy; what, a minister, and yet a drunkard? A minister, and yet a whoremonger? A minister, and yet without the fear of God? A minister, and yet have a dead heart? O consider what God says, what hast thou to do to declare my statutes, or that thou shouldest take my covenant within thy mouth, seeing thou hatest instruction, and hast cast my words behind thee? Psal. 50. 16, 17. With what face can we here stand in a pulpit, and preach against sin, and teach our hearers to make conscience of all their ways, and denounce the judgments of God against them that do evil, if we that condemn another do the same things or as bad? How inexcusable are we, if we can preach the straightness of heaven's gate, and the narrowness of the way, and the strictness of the account the people shall be forced to give at the last day, and lay heavy burdens on other men's shoulders, and we ourselves not touch them with one of our fingers? Teach precisely, and live loosely, teach graciously, and walk broadly? This is gross hypocrisy; act zeal and goodness in the pulpit, and be heartless and luke-warm in our private duties unto God.
Seems well. Also it manages to capitalize rightly "Son of Man". Quite impressive I would say. I think it detects that theological language is used so God of course is also capitalized rightly.
 
I will say t
This is what I did:

I pasted your 2nd text with the command "change this from upper case to proper cases"

Seems well. Also it manages to capitalize rightly "Son of Man". Quite impressive I would say. I think it detects that theological language is used so God of course is also capitalized rightly.
I also got better results putting it this way:

Change all sentences that begin with lower case letters, to begin with capital letters, in the following text.

"Secondly, are Ministers Angels? then they must be holy; ye know the Angels are holy: When the Son of man shall come in his glory, and all his holy Angels with him, Matth. 25. 31. They are holy all of them: so should the Ministers be holy; otherwise they may be Angels indeed, but they are evil angels, angels of darkness; they are Devils if they be not holy. Every ignorant, graceless, and unconscionable Minister is ready to press the dignity of his calling, and what an honorable office he hath; but he never considers what a Minister then he must be. If we be Angels, brethren, why then as we like this honorable Title, we must have a care to be holy, or else, I say, we are Devils. Those Angels that are not holy, are Devils. Nay, our very calling supposes us to be holy, Let thy Urim and thy Thummim be with thy holy one, Deut. 33. 8. so that our very calling will testify against us, if we be not holy: We of all men should labor to be holy; What, a Minister, and yet a drunkard? a Minister, and yet a whoremonger? a Minister, and yet without the fear of God? a Minister, and yet have a dead heart? O consider what God says, What hast thou to do to declare my statutes, or that thou shouldst take my covenant within thy mouth, seeing thou hatest instruction, and hast cast my words behind thee? Psal. 50. 16, 17. With what face can we here stand in a Pulpit, and preach against sin, and teach our hearers to make conscience of all their ways, and denounce the judgments of God against them that do evil, if we that condemn another do the same things or as bad? How inexcusable are we, if we can preach the straitness of heavens gate, and the narrowness of the way, and the strictness of the account the people shall be forced to give at the last day, and lay heavy burdens on other men's shoulders, and we ourselves not touch them with one of our fingers? Teach precisely, and live loosely, teach graciously, and walk broadly? This is gross hypocrisy; act zeal and goodness in the Pulpit, and be heartless and luke-warm in our private duties unto God."


"Secondly, are Ministers Angels? Then they must be holy; ye know the Angels are holy: When the Son of man shall come in his glory, and all his holy Angels with him, Matth. 25. 31. They are holy all of them: So should the Ministers be holy; otherwise they may be Angels indeed, but they are evil angels, angels of darkness; they are Devils if they be not holy. Every ignorant, graceless, and unconscionable Minister is ready to press the dignity of his calling, and what an honorable office he hath; but he never considers what a Minister then he must be. If we be Angels, brethren, why then as we like this honorable Title, we must have a care to be holy, or else, I say, we are Devils. Those Angels that are not holy, are Devils. Nay, our very calling supposes us to be holy, Let thy Urim and thy Thummim be with thy holy one, Deut. 33. 8. So that our very calling will testify against us, if we be not holy: We of all men should labor to be holy; What, a Minister, and yet a drunkard? A Minister, and yet a whoremonger? A Minister, and yet without the fear of God? A Minister, and yet have a dead heart? O consider what God says, What hast thou to do to declare my statutes, or that thou shouldst take my covenant within thy mouth, seeing thou hatest instruction, and hast cast my words behind thee? Psal. 50. 16, 17. With what face can we here stand in a Pulpit, and preach against sin, and teach our hearers to make conscience of all their ways, and denounce the judgments of God against them that do evil, if we that condemn another do the same things or as bad? How inexcusable are we, if we can preach the straitness of heavens gate, and the narrowness of the way, and the strictness of the account the people shall be forced to give at the last day, and lay heavy burdens on other men's shoulders, and we ourselves not touch them with one of our fingers? Teach precisely, and live loosely, teach graciously, and walk broadly? This is gross hypocrisy; act zeal and goodness in the Pulpit, and be heartless and luke-warm in our private duties unto God."
 
The thing is, though it may serve its purpose in these changes, though I dont entirely trust it. These change automatically using Word Wildcards. So there is no real benefit to using ChatGPT over the Wildcards (in my opinion.) What seems to me what is harder to trust it to do is make the proper spelling changes, and missing letter and word errors in the text. Looking at it this way, when Wildcards make the changes over the entire document, there again seems no real use in using Chat over Word at this moment for editing.

Also, ChatGPT only allows certain lengths of text to be entered, so it seems one would have to edit piece by piece. At least for the free model.
 
This looks like it may be beneficial for those looking to integrate ChatGPT into Word. But it still looks like you have to take it a paragraph at a time. Having to enter in all the different correction requests for each paragraph or segment of text, doesnt really seem time-saving at the moment when Wildcards make the corrections over the entire document.

 
You need to restrict the &/and replacements to avoid replacing the use of & in Latin, which stands for "et". I'm not sure how; most of the time Latin is in italics but not all the time.
 
I think the "so" following the "Deut. 33. 8." reference should remain lowercase.

Situations like this have to be taken contextually and proofed. I could have automatically capitalized all letters following an end-of-sentence mark, but then would have introduced other errors. That's also one reason why I didn't automatically substitute "God" for "god" throughout the texts, although it would have been simple to do: the authors in many cases could have been referring to "the god of this world" or "their belly is their god".

Dave: what Word calls a "wildcard" is basically a "regular expression" (regex) for short.
If you want to match multiple things at once, put them in square brackets:
Code:
[\.\?\!\"] [a-z]

This will match a period-space-lowercase letter, OR a question mark-space-lowercase letter, OR an exclamation point-space-lowercase letter, OR a quotation mark-space-lowercase letter all at once rather than doing them one at a time.

The parentheses are only needed if you want to use the match in your replace field. \1 is what is in the first parenthesis, \2 is what is in the second.
 
Last edited:
I think the "so" following the "Deut. 33. 8." reference should remain lowercase.

Situations like this have to be taken contextually and proofed. I could have automatically capitalized all letters following an end-of-sentence mark, but then would have introduced other errors. That's also one reason why I didn't automatically substitute "God" for "god" throughout the texts, although it would have been simple to do: the author in many text could have been referring to "the god of this world" or "their belly is their god".

Dave: what Word calls a "wildcard" is basically a "regular expression" (regex) for short.
If you want to match multiple things at once, put them in square brackets:
Code:
[\.\?\!\"] [a-z]

This will match a period-space-lowercase letter, OR a question mark-space-lowercase letter, OR an exclamation point-space-lowercase letter all at once rather than doing them one at a time.

The parentheses are only needed if you want to use the match in your replace field. \1 is what is in the first parenthesis, \2 is what is in the second.
I agree. In Word, if I were using Wildcards, it would have been changed to a comma by ([0-9]). ([a-z]) \1, \2 . This has its problems when you have lists within the paragraphs that start with lower-case, for example: He was going three ways 1. and it was here 2. and it was there, etc. So got to weigh the pros and cons of work trade-off. I havent really run into much text that ends with a period and begins with lower-case that should be capitalized. This is why I only search for ? and !

You need to restrict the &/and replacements to avoid replacing the use of & in Latin, which stands for "et". I'm not sure how; most of the time Latin is in italics but not all the time.
Thank you for letting me know this. I will keep my eye on this from now on to make sure the text within the Latin is reverted back to &. Many times the "& to and" in the entirety of the text far outweighs the work it will take to manually change them in the Latin.
 
Also, finding all the capital letters is fine, but you get mostly ones you don't care about. What you may also want is 2 or more capital letters next to each other, so do something like

Code:
[A-Z]{2}
which will ignore single capital letters but match two next to one another.
 
Also, finding all the capital letters is fine, but you get mostly ones you don't care about. What you really want is 2 or more capital letters next to each other, so do something like

Code:
[A-Z]{2}
which will ignore single capital letters but match two next to one another.
Nice. I have been doing ([A-Z])([A-Z]). This is much cleaner. Thank you. Finding all the caps is mainly for those who may want to change Puritan sentences that go something like "And he was at the Store, and Bought a Piece of Bread." Using Highlighting will allow someone to see the Capitals within a sentence to make the appropriate changes if desired. At the moment, I leave them. But I do use the grouped Capital Find to replace GOD and LORD to God and Lord, and to Highlight the beginning of paragraphs that have all-caps or the first few letters.
 
Another thing that may be helpful in finding capitalized words in the middle of a sentence would be to find things that match the following logic:

Find a space and a capital letter, but NOT when it is preceded by end-of-sentence punctuation. E.g. something like this:

Code:
[!\.\?\!\"] [A-Z]
The leading exclamation point inside the brackets says "exclude the following characters when looking for matches".
 
I guess the consensus is to update the cases? In the above text I would say ministers, angels, devils, title, pulpit should all be lowercase. I don't think this can be done by find/replace. And obviously not chatgpt. It has to be done manually.

What about archaic spellings? Or their overuse of colons and semicolons?

I'm prone to just leave everything as-is.
 
Last edited:
Logan noted context. The 17th century over capitalized and over italicized. If you do a lot of global replaces you will get some wrong, as I noted with the & et above. If you are publishing you can't avoid proof reading and editing.
 
Logan noted context. The 17th century over capitalized and over italicized. If you do a lot of global replaces you will get some wrong, as I noted with the & et above. If you are publishing you can't avoid proof reading and editing.
This is why I am fond of highlighting each change, and color-coding when possible. So you can see the changes as you edit the text.

12tt.jpg
 
I guess the consensus is to update the cases? In the above text I would say ministers, angels, devils, title, pulpit should all be lowercase. I don't think this can be done by find/replace. And obviously not chatgpt. It has to be done manually.

What about archaic spellings? Or their overuse of colons and semicolons?

I'm prone to just leave everything as-is.

That's why when automated the cleaning up of the 7,000+ EEBO documents, I was careful to only make changes to things that could be automated: primarily updating the spelling on entire word matches but leaving cases and punctuation and contextual decisions the same. Then whoever edits it can make their own decisions about how much they want to change. It can certainly leave more work for an editor but is a "purer" base text.
 
That's why when automated the cleaning up of the 7,000+ EEBO documents, I was careful to only make changes to things that could be automated: primarily updating the spelling on entire word matches but leaving cases and punctuation and contextual decisions the same. Then whoever edits it can make their own decisions about how much they want to change. It can certainly leave more work for an editor but is a "purer" base text.
Which I appreciate. :) Having yet another experience with EEBO files, this time Rutherford's Survey of Spiritual Antichrist (for RHB), a lot of these EEBO files can be a mess. I prefer some kind of other base text to work from and to use EEBO as only a check text; but that proved impossible for SSA. The typist does make mistakes, despite the claim for accuracy, but more importantly, which they can't possibly be counting in the error rate, they only can type what they can see. In the case of SSA, it is filled with [...] which not only stands for a letter the typist can't read, it is often whole words. So this requires comparing back to the original, or preferably a different facsimile example that may have a better printing showing the missing material. In the case of SSA I have a couple apart from the original EEB with the offending light printing.
 
Which I appreciate. :) Having yet another experience with EEBO files, this time Rutherford's Survey of Spiritual Antichrist (for RHB), a lot of these EEBO files can be a mess. I prefer some kind of other base text to work from and to use EEBO as only a check text; but that proved impossible for SSA. The typist does make mistakes, despite the claim for accuracy, but more importantly, which they can't possibly be counting in the error rate, they only can type what they can see. In the case of SSA, it is filled with [...] which not only stands for a letter the typist can't read, it is often whole words. So this requires comparing back to the original, or preferably a different facsimile example that may have a better printing showing the missing material. In the case of SSA I have a couple apart from the original EEB with the offending light printing.

In my ideal world, all the EEBO texts I cleaned would be available to use as a "starter" to save typing but should always be compared to a PDF or something of the original. Because like you, I don't trust that there aren't words or even entire pages missing from the transcription!
 
In my ideal world, all the EEBO texts I cleaned would be available to use as a "starter" to save typing but should always be compared to a PDF or something of the original. Because like you, I don't trust that there aren't words or even entire pages missing from the transcription!
They are good for starters. And they do save people time from typing out the entire text. Project Puritas made EEBO-TCP texts many-times more usable than they were. Pair this with the ability for people to get EEBO access with personal subscriptions, which many times includes numerous PDF's of the same text, and there is no reason that many of these works cannot be brought to light; whether in electronic or physical form. It is a matter of effort, not so much skill, and unfortunately because of lack of drive, free-time, or plain desire; many more people are consumers rather than contributors to the cause. It is what it is. EEBO-TCP's transcription process is no more prone to errors then if you sent the same 60,000 files to any transcription company in the world. Human effort = error. What Project Puritas saw that others did not, was the beauty that could come from the ashes. Almost everyone talked crap about TCP prior. Before, it would take months to get a book in good condition. Now, for many of the texts, it is a matter of days or weeks. You have done all you can do. All we can pray for is the Lord to raise up more people willing to work a bit. Puritan literature is finite. There are only so many books. Just got to keep chipping away at it, and pretty soon, Lord Willing, they will all be accessible to all. EEBO-TCP and Project Puritas has given the genre a huge head start. I dont think God did this for nothing.

Also, we have to keep in mind that there has been a set way of doing this for a long-time, and that EEBO-TCP was only finished in 2020 and Project Puritas in 2023. People are not accustomed to change. The fact that there are 7,000 texts that we can choose from, and make usable books from, from almost any Puritan author, within a couple days-weeks doesnt sit well with some; especially those chained to the traditional publishing methods; or who see them more as a route to physical sustenance. All it is really going to take, and what I pray for, is a few more people willing to labor to polish these to offer to the world for free. Then, these texts will finally be "unlocked" for the world at large. It is time. Dont take my word for it, simply look at the evidence.

There is nothing wrong with selling books, some people will always prefer physical over digital, and there are costs to print publishing, including labor. But there is a difference between having to purchase a public domain work, and choosing to. Especially considering that most of the current industry has nothing to do with creative works, but simply (yet laboriously) cleaning up the work of others. A worker is worth their wages, but it is a pitty to have seen how some want to milk every cent out of something they didnt write. This is where EEBO-TCP/Project Puritas stands out. It has put these texts into the hands of the people. Not just scholars, not just people with vast libraries or access to rare texts, not just a collective of 5 or 6 publishing companies, but to all; especially those willing to help see it to its fruition.

I know you are humble, but do not minimize what you have done. Its impact will be fealt for generations. Especially those places where it is now reaching who would otherwise have no access to these texts.
 
Last edited:
I don't know whose doing this. Not RHB; not Banner. One can certainly buy any EEB text in facsimile from a multitude of companies in India; even leatherbound! (just search abebooks on any puritan title). That is opportunism. My approach I've noted before; which is more a critical one than simply making a text readable; often half of the work if not also the text in a critical edition is background, biography, and bibliographical research, etc. So we know far more now, for instance, about James Durham or George Gillespie, Nicholas Bownd, etc. (if I do say so myself) than at any other point. That to me is worthy of the craft of the printed book.
A worker is worth their wages, but it is a pitty to have seen how some want to milk every cent out of something they didnt write.
 
I don't know whose doing this. Not RHB; not Banner. One can certainly buy any EEB text in facsimile from a multitude of companies in India; even leatherbound! (just search abebooks on any puritan title). That is opportunism. My approach I've noted before; which is more a critical one than simply making a text readable; often half of the work if not also the text in a critical edition is background, biography, and bibliographical research, etc. So we know far more now, for instance, about James Durham or George Gillespie, Nicholas Bownd, etc. (if I do say so myself) than at any other point. That to me is worthy of the craft of the printed book.
That is true, and that is why I mentioned a worker is definitely worth their wages. But at the same time, every print text almost, if I am not mistaken, has a digital (at least for a while now) counterpart. Meaning, the text was edited in a Word Processor of some sort. These texts, with almost no effort, can be made into eBooks, with almost no publishing costs. Some places charge just as much for the digital as the print, and many more places do not even offer a digital equivalent for what seemingly is to pigeon-hole someone into buying the physical. If the goal were merely the proliferation of Puritan Literature, as opposed to an equal (God forbid greater) business side, then wouldnt effort be made to make these texts accessible to all? Instead, it seems for some, the texts are for those who can afford them.

There is no denying there is a business side to Puritan Literature. And that is why I am applauding EEBO-TCP/Project Puritas. Because it includes over 6,500 works form at least 980 authors (at least for Puritans & non-Conformists,) there is almost no text that cannot be made into an eBook for free mass distro. And like I mentioned, some people will always prefer physical, and for those the costs to produce such should be accounted. But to have a text, and keep it in the format to garnish the most returns makes me wonder. Not too much, because now there is an alternative; but I can only image the years there was not.

I dont have any hate either way. Its really all-good. But I have to congratulate what God did through people like Logan. Who used their skill not for profit, but so that people could be spiritually fed whether they were well-to-do or impoverished. In the West, we many times take for granted our economic stability. But seeing the testimonies of people whom this free literature has blessed, can kind of get one back to reality that not everyone has it so good.

Psalm 41:1-4.

RHB charging $120 for its Reasonable Service 4 vol. and $135 for the eBook is a business decision. That is my point. Again, no hate towards them, but it just seems weird.
 
Last edited:
It is not more pious to do stuff for free; or to give work away; nor is having a business approach impious. Both no doubt could be done sinfully; but I'm speaking in theory. Time costs; so either you are independently funded from another job or you try to make publishing your job to have work and make a living. The model needs to be effective and efficient and not burning the candle at both ends, or it won't work or last. Folks are aware enough of efforts that are slap in a file and sell. The main stays, RHB, Banner, are not doing that. Folks figure out the shysters.
That is true, and that is why I mentioned a worker is definitely worth their wages. But at the same time, every print text almost, if I am not mistaken, has a digital (at least for a while now) counterpart. Meaning, the text was edited in a Word Processor of some sort. These texts, with almost no effort, can be made into eBooks, with almost no publishing costs. Some places charge just as much for the digital as the print, and many more places do not even offer a digital equivalent for what seemingly is to pigeon-hole someone into buying the physical. If the goal were merely the proliferation of Puritan Literature, as opposed to an equal (God forbid greater) business side, then wouldnt effort be made to make these texts accessible to all? Instead, it seems for some, the texts are for those who can afford them.

There is no denying there is a business side to Puritan Literature. And that is why I am applauding EEBO-TCP/Project Puritas. Because it includes over 6,500 works form at least 980 authors, there is almost no text that cannot be made into an eBook for free mass distro. And like I mentioned, some people will always prefer physical, and for those the costs to produce such should be accounted. But to have a text, and keep it in the format to garnish the most returns makes me wonder. Not too much, because now there is an alternative; but I can only image the years there was not.
 
For your first point, I refer to Acts 20:34-35. I also understand that business models are constrained by their necessity to remain profitable. Again, this is why I am thrilled with this fairly recent opportunity in Puritan publishing that is free many times of the constraints of not only the physical publishing model, but much of the previous labor costs to produce such works. It "unchains" these texts from providers/producers who must have their business interests in mind, and now puts them into the hands of not just those who can afford them, but who have the simple desire to be spiritually edified by these saints of old.
 
These texts, with almost no effort, can be made into eBooks, with almost no publishing costs.
Maybe others have had better success, but editing one of these works, even for eBook format, takes a LOT of time. I suggest you try one and put it out there for us to enjoy.
 
Maybe others have had better success, but editing one of these works, even for eBook format, takes a LOT of time. I suggest you try one and put it out there for us to enjoy.

:think:

 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top