Guest guest Posted September 28, 2005 Report Share Posted September 28, 2005 > > I am currently editing a book that the author wants to keep > > simple and straightforward, no diacritics--not for names, or > > any other words like "brahmacaris" etc. But when he writes the > > names of scriptures, it seems right to add diacritics. > > > > Comments? Right/wrong answers? > > In my limited experience, it seems that half of editing is > consistency. To that end I'd either go with diacritics all the > way or leave them out completely. I feel that's an over-simplified response (not to mention one that's so obvious that it should have occurred to you that it may have been considered already . But maybe I should have mentioned it's not sastra; it's Vaiyasaki's next volume of Radha Damodara Vilas, so it's reading more like a novel, a story. It seems quite acceptable to have a book of this style that's free of diacritics; it's not scripture, it lends itself easy-reading to do without it, and it flows more smoothly. But it doesn't seem to make sense to maintain that standard when quoting from scripture: it's scripture, and it's written with diacritics. It's not a matter of easy-reading, it's one verse, one line even. So I was asking: is there an accepted standard? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.