![]() |
||||||
|
SHAKSPER 1997: Re: DNA Evidence; Line Numbers
From: Hardy M. Cook (editor@ws.bowiestate.edu) Date: 11/26/97
The Shakespeare Conference: SHK 8.1207. Wednesday, 26 November 1997.
[1] From: Scott Shepherd <skot@pobox.com>
Date: Tuesday, 25 Nov 1997 16:01:48 -0500
Subj: Re: SHK 8.1201 DNA Evidence
[2] From: William P Williams <tb0wpw1@corn.cso.niu.edu>
Date: Tuesday, 25 Nov 1997 16:20:01 -0600 (CST)
Subj: Re: SHK 8.1203 Line Numbers
[1]-----------------------------------------------------------------
From: Scott Shepherd <skot@pobox.com>
Date: Tuesday, 25 Nov 1997 16:01:48 -0500
Subject: 8.1201 DNA Evidence
Comment: Re: SHK 8.1201 DNA Evidence
>But with two billion of us on
>Earth, two persons might easily share a one-in-a-billion pattern.
>Reasonable doubt?
On the contrary, I think this is exactly the kind of doubt we mean to
disregard by using the "reasonable" qualifier.
In court we don't normally deal with the population of Earth. It's a
relative handful of people who could possibly be involved in a given
series of events, and a much smaller number who are likely to be.
[2]-----------------------------------------------------------------
From: William P Williams <tb0wpw1@corn.cso.niu.edu>
Date: Tuesday, 25 Nov 1997 16:20:01 -0600 (CST)
Subject: 8.1203 Line Numbers
Comment: Re: SHK 8.1203 Line Numbers
In the case of line numbers in Shakespeare it makes a difference if the
text is verse or prose, if the editors have done any re-lining, whether
sections have been emended in or out, and similar considerations. In
the case of prose, the page width of the edition will dictate the line
numbering. Gone are the days when the "old" Cambridge edition's numbers
were the norm.
William Proctor Williams
English/NIU
wwilliam@niu.edu
|
|
|||||