TMG-L ArchivesArchiver > TMG > 2003-04 > 1050281904
From: "James P. Colgate" <>
Subject: Re: [TMG] 5.06: first name only for witnesses
Date: Sun, 13 Apr 2003 20:58:24 -0400
References: <NIEGKEACAPDMIDCJOGDEEEFEFAAA.firstname.lastname@example.org> <email@example.com> <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Comments below . . . .
> Paul and Glee
> I tried both variations, and no matter which one I used RF or RG, I always
> get the full name in the witness output. Either variation always gives the
> given (first) name in the primary roll.
> I guess the fault lies in the sentence construction I use for HoF:
> [:CR:][RF:Head of Family] was listed as the head of a family, <[M1],> on
> the 1870 Census <at [L],> <enumerated on [D]>. <[M2].><[WO] were listed
> with him on the census.><So was [RF:household member], his wife.>
> and for witnesses: [RF:household member2], age 20, was listed as a
> household member living with [R:Head of Family] on the 1870 Census <at
> <enumerated on [D]>. <[M0].>
> I don't know how to make the [WO] use only the first name.
I'm sure others with more know-how can address the first name issue. Name
styles are an option as well, but I'm unfamiliar with this as I'm still in
But I will make a suggestion about your principal sentence structure. In
addition to [R:Head of Family], you might consider adding 1 more role which
can be assigned to a principal, something like [R:H of Family One Wit].
That way you can have a standard sentence structure to accommodate
households with only one child, using this conditional in your sentence
structure (note that WERE is now WAS):
<[WO] was listed with him on the census.>
Just a thought, though.
|Re: [TMG] 5.06: first name only for witnesses by "James P. Colgate" <>|