A sidetrack if I may
Re Confusions.
It is not just symbols that can be mis-understood. The word “peruse” and the word “disinterest” fascinate me.
To me, “peruse” means to carefully read and examine in minute detail (oh, “minute” can confuse too) ... I mean to study for much longer than sixty seconds (‘seconds’ oh confusion reigns ... “reigns” oh deary me
) ... Anyway, sometimes I peruse a thread at RChat and after carefully reading it and thinking about it “mulling over”, I then post.
To me “peruse” also means to glance over rather quickly, without taking time out to study carefully. Anyway, sometimes I peruse a thread at RChat and “skim” over it, and I then post. So there’s two “opposing” meanings to “peruse”. So when I use the word “peruse” I would also need to take into account the context in which I use it and also the likelihood of others using it with either of those meanings. So I avoid using the word in posts, thus I avoid the confusion/ambiguity.
To me “disinterest” means to have a deep understanding of something ie an educated interest in the subject but not to have, nor seek to have, any benefit/interest derived from/by that interest. So a Judge would be required to have a deep understanding of the relevant laws pertaining to a trial over which he/she was presiding. Thus his/her determination in applying Justice is bound up in his “disinterest” in the evidence and witness statements etc v the laws/regulations/written and unwritten practices etc. However, I am well aware that the meaning of the word “disinterest” is moving rapidly towards the meaning of the word “uninterested” (ie not interested). That is, I am well aware that “disinterest” is now coming to mean “not seeking to have any knowledge of”and not anticipating any self benefit/interest. So there are some RChat threads that I am a disinterested participant, and there are other threads in which I am not interested. However, this thread is fascinating me, and my disinterest is becoming significant to me.
So, coming back on topic, I note that the tree drafter’s name is known (see reply #20). Does his name appear as a family member on the chart? Have any other tree charts been found to have been prepared by him?
So his use of symbols, the way he chose to set out (layout) his B ledger sheet, his abbreviations, the overall and the minute detail are all part of my disinterest regarding the context of that chart. Of course that context is also dependent on the era in which he prepared it, his own background, his education, his location and the level (over time and experience) of his then involvement in genealogy along with so many other factors. Similarly the way several different authors of published biographies undertook the family history research about that person and then use their own words to then publish that research can lead to different and at times opposing positions about their subjects.
That to me is what gives any person’s own interest in their own family history the chance to seek out and research for themselves via such 21st century tools as RChat and RChatters co-operative efforts.
The tree chart that RM is working on for Eleesavet is a fine example of RChatters co-operative efforts, and this thread is simply another.
I thank (usually silently) RChat for the opportunity to express my thoughts and words on every occasion that I post.
Thank you RChat.
Cheers, JM
