Transcriber’s Note in Nemeth

[Chris Clemens]

One of our program participants asked to have this posted:

"According to the errata of the Nemeth Course, a transcriber’s note must begin 6 cells to the right of the margin in effect, with runovers 4 cells to the right of such margin. Section 186 of the Nemeth Code states that the TN must be placed in accordance with Braille Formats, which states that transcriber’s notes begin in cell 7 with runovers in cell 5 without regard to the margin in effect. Which is to be followed? I am waiting (rather impatiently) to receive the Nemeth exam, and I would like to know which standard to use."

We appreciate your feedback on the question.
Marie Amerson
Georgia Braille Transcribers

[Chris Clemens]

The margin in effect is not part of the Nemeth Code or Braille Formats. Follow Braille Formats rules for any formatting that is not defined by the Nemeth Code for use in Nemeth transcriptions. When the 2007 Update to the Nemeth Code was adopted, it replaced all previous updates to the Code. Although there is no official update document for the Nemeth Course, if an item in the Course errata is not supported by the Code itself or the Update (2007) or any subsequent updates as posted on BANA's website, it should not be followed.
edited by dworthing on 1/5/2011

[Chris Clemens]

Thank you Dorothy. The individual wanted further clarification.
"I have a couple of questions concerning your response to Transcriber’s Note in Nemeth.
I want to make sure that I understand your answer. Because I am waiting to take the Nemeth exam, I want to be clear on this. Are you saying that if there is something in the course that is not in the Code or the 2007 Update it should not be followed? There are several things in the course that are not in the Code. For example, in §181.c of the course book we are instructed to treat ununified systems of equations as spatial. The course errata changed this section from not spatial to spatial. There is no counterpart to this in the code book. So, because this course errata is not supported by the Nemeth Code itself nor the 2007 Update, nor anything on the BANA website, it should not be followed. Therefore, the ununified systems of equations should not be considered to be spatial and the original section in the course book restored. Is that correct?
Another example of something in the course that is not in the Code is in §36.b of the course book, which states in part, “An abbreviation and a preceding or following numeral or letter to which it applies must be placed on the same braille line.” There is no such requirement, that I can find, in the Code book, nor is there anything in EBAE or Braille Formats. This is not part of the errata, but the original course material. Should I continue to follow this practice?
As there are several things that are in the course that are not in the Code, I’m wondering how I will be graded on the Nemeth test? Is it a test of the Nemeth code, or the Nemeth course?"

Thank you for your help in understanding this complex issue.

Marie

[Chris Clemens]

Rule XXV section 195c says "An abbreviation must not be placed on a different braille line from its preceding or following numeral or letter."

As to your other point, I will follow up on that as quickly as I can. Dorothy

[Chris Clemens]

The treatment of the systems of equations as discussed in the course book is an interpretation of the Code. The errata was correcting the interpretation, not changing the Code. Systems of equations are spatial and would be preceded and followed by blank lines, regardless of the presence (or not) of enlarged grouping symbols. That definition got muddied because the only discussion about systems of equations in the Code was in the section about enlarged grouping symbols.

I don't know if that clarifies the situation. The Nemeth test is a test of the code and not a test of the course. The course book should only be used to help understand what is written in the code, not to base your decisions on.

[Author]

Posts