Here are the answers to yesterday’s transcription test. Note how there actually are some major differences in the “answers” copy. Names and words were Latin-ized. So I will give you the answer to the original.
1. Mičhal Leičht
2. Waczlaw Majer
4. Jakob Kostner
5. Ssebestian Fait podruh Zemitzky [day Laborer in Zemětice]
Sebastian feit Inquillinus [latin for day laborer]
6. Dorota Lishkowa
Dorothea Lishka [thinking of you, sistah!]
7. Pawel Hess
8. Ondřej Ress
9. Baltazar Radda podruh zemenžky
Balthazar Radda Inquillinus [uxor Catharina – and his wife Catharina]
Lesson learned: a double ss is the equivalent of š, or sh.
2 thoughts on “Czech Handwriting Transcription Test 1 ANSWERS”
Mičhal Leičht? no!
c with háček is not č in this instance(case) it's c only
by czech is Michal Leicht
You are right, the Czech name is Michal Leicht. We both know that Mičhal is not a real name.
Here is my reason for transcribing č instead of c. Every instance of "c" or "č" on this page was written as "č". As a transcriber, I have a duty to write exactly what I see, even if it was not spelled correctly.
German Current handwriting conventions do not place the háček (btw, thanks for correcting me on the spelling of this word!) over a non-háček-ed c. Even though I noticed that the enumerator of this record chose to write all of his "c's" and "č's" the same, i.e. with a háček, I can't pick and choose which ones he meant to have a háček, and which ones he did not.
In German Current handwriting, there is a háček over every instance of "u". The person transcribing the word would not ever place a háček over this letter in a transcription. This diacritical mark seems to be to differentiate u's from n's, m's, c's, and other similarly shaped letters.
In any case, knowing that the enumerator meant to write Michal Leicht, I don't have a problem per se with somebody else transcribing the record Michal Leicht instead of Mičhal Leicht. My own personal preference is to write what I see exactly as I see it, and I see a háček.
It's an interesting discussion, though! I appreciate it! Thank you for reading and commenting 🙂