I have a transcript I am working on, and whenever the deponent refers to a year, she says 204, 205, 206, etc. instead of 2004, 2005, 2006. She does this several times throughout the whole job.

Verbatim, she said, "In 205, it was only me."
But for clarity, 2005 seems better.

Not sure what to do, any thoughts, and how would you do it??

Thanks!

Views: 81

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

Hi, Erin. I don't know if you've had a chance to check out the Comma Conundrums and Other Punctuation Perplexities section of this forum, but there's some GREAT information there, just waiting for the taking. :-)

Here's a link that might be helpful to your inquiry: Shortening of Years

Hope this helps! :-)
I am annoyed by this. I think I'm going to start interrupting the witness and ask them do they mean February 2006 or the year 2006.

Okay. That probably wasn't helpful, but it is annoying.

As others have said, if it's not videotaped, my tendency would be to just fix it or you could put 2'06 all run together to denote that the zero in the 100s position is missing.

At this point, it's probably a matter of how you want to do it. Whatever you choose to do, remain consistent throughout the transcript, so no switching back and forth.
Definitely annoying, Kyung. Lazy speakers. My ex-husband used to say Fi dollars (long I), instead of five dollars. Made me cringe.
Erin,

Well, "verbatim" she said two-oh-five, not 205 (reading two hundred and five) . (grin)

There was a discussion about this on depoman recently and on the CRF. Some people put 2'05 -- although no one could find an authoritative source to do so -- and some put two-oh-five. Others go with 2005 since, like you said, that's obviously what the speaker means and it certainly makes for a more readable transcript.

The deciding factor for some reporters was whether it was a video job or not.

It will be interesting to see what others say here. Best of all would be if someone came up with a rule from a punctuation authority.
I WOULD THINK THE AUTHORITATIVE SOURCE WOULD BE THE SAME REASON WE PUT '98, THE APOSTROPHE IS IN PLACE OF THE "19."
I never though about that, Tami! That's a great idea.

I, too, have this come up every once in a while. But it seems, in my situations, that they only say it once or twice and then say it correct the rest of the time. I would write "two oh four" for those one or two places, and then, of course, write the rest as she/he said them correctly; 2004.

I really like the idea of 2'04, but I'm afraid some (a lot of them here;) lol) would not understand what that meant. And, although we are to use our grammar correctly, I also think we use it for a certain "readability" for out clients, too. I'll really have to think about that though, because I think I like it better. Hmmmm... :)
Thank you to everyone for their informative responses!
I have decided to write the full year, 2004, 2005, etc., for the sake of clarity.
This transcript is already going to be a TERRIBLE read due to the deponent's inability to let others finish speaking, her need to repeat every statement twice, and her sudden change of thought in the middle of a sentence!

I know I can't clean up her choppy speaking skills, so writing out the entire year is the absolute least I can do help any poor soul who will be reading this thing!

Had it been an educated and eloquent speaker, I probably would have gone the 2'04 route!
Hi, Erin. Sometimes I wonder if I take the verbatim thing too far. I'd give her the benefit of the doubt, because you know exactly what she's saying, adn put 2005, 2004, whatever.

M.A.
So wouldn't it be 2'04 instead of 20'4 since you're trying to make the same point as '04?

I'm a legal transcriptionist, which is obviously not court reporting. When I transcribe legal proceedings, I probably take the verbatim thing too far. I always want to create an accurate record, so I put exactly what they say instead of cleaning it up (unless I'm told by my contract to clean it up). I don't want anything to come back on me as editing the record. I don't feel like it's my place to do that; I'm just transcribing what's been said.

Plus, I don't like to make people look smarter than they are. If they speak like a dufus, I'm sure as heck going to put that down on paper. ;)

Just my two cents.
I fix it to be 2004, but it sure drives me crazy! And I'm getting a lot of the "12-13-8" instead of saying "12-13-08," but I'm fixing that too. Oh, and the "It happened in either '05, '6, or '7." Grr.

RSS

© 2022   Created by Kelli Combs (admin).   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service