sentence-transformers/squad huggingface dataset:
Passage: By 1939, in his Prolegomena for the Oxford Shakespeare, McKerrow had changed his mind about this approach, as he feared that a later edition – even if it contained authorial corrections – would "deviate more widely than the earliest print from the author's original manuscript." He therefore concluded that the correct procedure would be "produced by using the earliest "good" print as copy-text and inserting into it, from the first edition which contains them, such corrections as appear to us to be derived from the author." But, fearing the arbitrary exercise of editorial judgment, McKerrow stated that, having concluded that a later edition had substantive revisions attributable to the author, "we must accept all the alterations of that edition, saving any which seem obvious blunders or misprints."

Question: Why did McKerrow alter his previous method of criticism?

Question: How did McKerrow alter his approach to copy-text analysis?

Question: What did McKerrow concede about his new copy-text method?

Question: What work was the first to see McKerrow use his new method?
Passage: Although Greg argued that an editor should be free to use his judgment to choose between competing substantive readings, he suggested that an editor should defer to the copy-text when "the claims of two readings ... appear to be exactly balanced. ... In such a case, while there can be no logical reason for giving preference to the copy-text, in practice, if there is no reason for altering its reading, the obvious thing seems to be to let it stand." The "exactly balanced" variants are said to be indifferent.

Question: Are there times when an editor's judgement should be deferred?

Question: What should one do when two readings are contradictory but balanced?

Question: What do editors call variants that are exactly balanced?
Passage: Whereas Greg had limited his illustrative examples to English Renaissance drama, where his expertise lay, Bowers argued that the rationale was "the most workable editorial principle yet contrived to produce a critical text that is authoritative in the maximum of its details whether the author be Shakespeare, Dryden, Fielding, Nathaniel Hawthorne, or Stephen Crane. The principle is sound without regard for the literary period." For works where an author's manuscript survived – a case Greg had not considered – Bowers concluded that the manuscript should generally serve as copy-text. Citing the example of Nathaniel Hawthorne, he noted:

Question: Is the idea formed by Greg limited to a specific time period?

Question: What will an editor do in the case where an author's work was not wiped out?

Question: What where the limitations of Greg's analyses?

Question: What is the main criticism of Greg's work?
Passage: McKerrow had articulated textual criticism's goal in terms of "our ideal of an author's fair copy of his work in its final state". Bowers asserted that editions founded on Greg's method would "represent the nearest approximation in every respect of the author's final intentions." Bowers stated similarly that the editor's task is to "approximate as nearly as possible an inferential authorial fair copy." Tanselle notes that, "Textual criticism ... has generally been undertaken with a view to reconstructing, as accurately as possible, the text finally intended by the author".

Question: What are editors trying to ultimately accomplish?

Question: If an editor can't achieve an exact reproduction of an authors work, what should be the goal?

Question: What did Bower's say about Greg's method?

Question: What did Tanselle say about textual criticism?
Passage: Bowers and Tanselle argue for rejecting textual variants that an author inserted at the suggestion of others. Bowers said that his edition of Stephen Crane's first novel, Maggie, presented "the author's final and uninfluenced artistic intentions." In his writings, Tanselle refers to "unconstrained authorial intention" or "an author's uninfluenced intentions." This marks a departure from Greg, who had merely suggested that the editor inquire whether a later reading "is one that the author can reasonably be supposed to have substituted for the former", not implying any further inquiry as to why the author had made the change.

Question: Who argued against works where the author listens to input from others?

Question: Who wanted to determine why an author made changes to a work?

Question: Does Greg believe a later work can be substituted for a earlier one?

Question: What idea did Tanselle champion?
Passage: Bowers confronted a similar problem in his edition of Maggie. Crane originally printed the novel privately in 1893. To secure commercial publication in 1896, Crane agreed to remove profanity, but he also made stylistic revisions. Bowers's approach was to preserve the stylistic and literary changes of 1896, but to revert to the 1893 readings where he believed that Crane was fulfilling the publisher's intention rather than his own. There were, however, intermediate cases that could reasonably have been attributed to either intention, and some of Bowers's choices came under fire – both as to his judgment, and as to the wisdom of conflating readings from the two different versions of Maggie.

Question: What alterations did Crane make to secure commercial publication?

Question: What was Bower's first step in editing multiple works into a single product?

Question: What was Bower's second step in editing multiple works into a single product?

Question: What was one of the criticisms Bowers faced after editing Maggie?

Question: I what year was Maggie printed for commercial use?

Question: What was the first step Bowers took in editing a single work with two versions?

Question: What was the second step Bowers took in editing a single work with two versions?

Question: What changes were made for the commercial publication of Maggie?

Question: When was Maggie first published?
Passage: Some critics believe that a clear-text edition gives the edited text too great a prominence, relegating textual variants to appendices that are difficult to use, and suggesting a greater sense of certainty about the established text than it deserves. As Shillingsburg notes, "English scholarly editions have tended to use notes at the foot of the text page, indicating, tacitly, a greater modesty about the "established" text and drawing attention more forcibly to at least some of the alternative forms of the text".

Question: Are appendices easy to use for the average reader?

Question: Can a reader be certain of the validity of information found in a clear-text edition?

Question: How do most editors work around the reference problems of clear-text editing?

Question: Where can a reader find more information on text variants after noticing a footnote?
Passage: Cladistics is a technique borrowed from biology, where it was originally named phylogenetic systematics by Willi Hennig. In biology, the technique is used to determine the evolutionary relationships between different species. In its application in textual criticism, the text of a number of different manuscripts is entered into a computer, which records all the differences between them. The manuscripts are then grouped according to their shared characteristics. The difference between cladistics and more traditional forms of statistical analysis is that, rather than simply arranging the manuscripts into rough groupings according to their overall similarity, cladistics assumes that they are part of a branching family tree and uses that assumption to derive relationships between them. This makes it more like an automated approach to stemmatics. However, where there is a difference, the computer does not attempt to decide which reading is closer to the original text, and so does not indicate which branch of the tree is the "root"—which manuscript tradition is closest to the original. Other types of evidence must be used for that purpose.

Question: What is the biological basis for Cladistics?

Question: How is evolution applied to textual criticism?

Question: How is cladistics similar to the stemmatic method?

Question: What is the main difference between cladistics and stemmatics?
Passage: Although some earlier unpublished studies had been prepared, not until the early 1970s was true textual criticism applied to the Book of Mormon. At that time BYU Professor Ellis Rasmussen and his associates were asked by the LDS Church to begin preparation for a new edition of the Holy Scriptures. One aspect of that effort entailed digitizing the text and preparing appropriate footnotes, another aspect required establishing the most dependable text. To that latter end, Stanley R. Larson (a Rasmussen graduate student) set about applying modern text critical standards to the manuscripts and early editions of the Book of Mormon as his thesis project – which he completed in 1974. To that end, Larson carefully examined the Original Manuscript (the one dictated by Joseph Smith to his scribes) and the Printer’s Manuscript (the copy Oliver Cowdery prepared for the Printer in 1829–1830), and compared them with the 1st, 2nd, and 3rd editions of the Book of Mormon to determine what sort of changes had occurred over time and to make judgments as to which readings were the most original. Larson proceeded to publish a useful set of well-argued articles on the phenomena which he had discovered. Many of his observations were included as improvements in the 1981 LDS edition of the Book of Mormon.

Question: When did textual criticism applied to the Book of Mormon?

Question: What was one portion of preparing a new edition of the Holy Scriptures?

Question: How was the most reliable version of the Holy Scriptures determined?

Question: When did Larson finish his project?

Question: Whose observations were included in the 1981 publication of the Book of Mormon?
Passage: By 1979, with the establishment of the Foundation for Ancient Research and Mormon Studies (FARMS) as a California non-profit research institution, an effort led by Robert F. Smith began to take full account of Larson’s work and to publish a Critical Text of the Book of Mormon. Thus was born the FARMS Critical Text Project which published the first volume of the 3-volume Book of Mormon Critical Text in 1984. The third volume of that first edition was published in 1987, but was already being superseded by a second, revised edition of the entire work, greatly aided through the advice and assistance of then Yale doctoral candidate Grant Hardy, Dr. Gordon C. Thomasson, Professor John W. Welch (the head of FARMS), Professor Royal Skousen, and others too numerous to mention here. However, these were merely preliminary steps to a far more exacting and all-encompassing project.

Question: What is FARMS?

Question: Who spearheaded the Critical Text of the Book of Mormon project?

Question: How many years did it take to publish all three volumes of the Book of Mormon Critical Text?

Question: Was the third volume of the first edition deemed sufficient?

Question: Who is the head of FARMS?
Passage: In 1988, with that preliminary phase of the project completed, Professor Skousen took over as editor and head of the FARMS Critical Text of the Book of Mormon Project and proceeded to gather still scattered fragments of the Original Manuscript of the Book of Mormon and to have advanced photographic techniques applied to obtain fine readings from otherwise unreadable pages and fragments. He also closely examined the Printer’s Manuscript (owned by the Community of Christ—RLDS Church in Independence, Missouri) for differences in types of ink or pencil, in order to determine when and by whom they were made. He also collated the various editions of the Book of Mormon down to the present to see what sorts of changes have been made through time.

Question: When was phase one completed?

Question: Who took over after the preliminary phase?

Question: Why did Professor Skousen gather fragments and have them analyzed?

Question: What process what used to study the gathered fragments?

Question: On what did Skousen analyze ink and pencil remnants?
Passage: Shemaryahu Talmon, who summarized the amount of consensus and genetic relation to the Urtext of the Hebrew Bible, concluded that major divergences which intrinsically affect the sense are extremely rare. As far as the Hebrew Bible referenced by Old Testament is concerned, almost all of the textual variants are fairly insignificant and hardly affect any doctrine. Professor Douglas Stuart states: "It is fair to say that the verses, chapters, and books of the Bible would read largely the same, and would leave the same impression with the reader, even if one adopted virtually every possible alternative reading to those now serving as the basis for current English translations."

Question: How common are variations in text that alter the meaning of the Urtext of the Hebrew Bible?

Question: To what degree do variations in the Old Testament alter the meaning?

Question: Who claims that the Old Testament is essentially the same throughout all variations?

Question: How many variations of the Old Testament offer the same meaning?
Passage: While textual criticism developed into a discipline of thorough analysis of the Bible — both the Hebrew Bible and the New Testament — scholars also use it to determine the original content of classic texts, such as Plato's Republic. There are far fewer witnesses to classical texts than to the Bible, so scholars can use stemmatics and, in some cases, copy text editing. However, unlike the New Testament where the earliest witnesses are within 200 years of the original, the earliest existing manuscripts of most classical texts were written about a millennium after their composition. All things being equal, textual scholars expect that a larger time gap between an original and a manuscript means more changes in the text.

Question: Does the Bible or Plato's Republic have more witnesses?

Question: What's the gap between original Christian texts and subsequent editions of the same works?

Question: What's the gap between original classical texts and subsequent editions of the same works?

Question: How does the expanse of time correlate to authenticity with regard to original and subsequent versions of texts?
Passage: Scientific and critical editions can be protected by copyright as works of authorship if enough creativity/originality is provided. The mere addition of a word, or substitution of a term with another one believed to be more correct, usually does not achieve such level of originality/creativity. All the notes accounting for the analysis and why and how such changes have been made represent a different work autonomously copyrightable if the other requirements are satisfied. In the European Union critical and scientific editions may be protected also by the relevant neighboring right that protects critical and scientific publications of public domain works as made possible by art. 5 of the Copyright Term Directive. Not all EU member States have transposed art. 5 into national law.

Question: What is the criteria for copyright?

Question: What minor things can be included and not invalidate a copyright?

Question: Are footnotes included in the copyright of the original work?

Question: What rights do scientific publications in the EU enjoy?
Passage: A gramophone record (phonograph record in American English) or vinyl record, commonly known as a "record", is an analogue sound storage medium in the form of a flat polyvinyl chloride (previously shellac) disc with an inscribed, modulated spiral groove. The groove usually starts near the periphery and ends near the center of the disc. Phonograph records are generally described by their diameter in inches (12", 10", 7"), the rotational speed in rpm at which they are played (16 2⁄3, 33 1⁄3, 45, 78), and their time capacity resulting from a combination of those parameters (LP – long playing 33 1⁄3 rpm, SP – 78 rpm single, EP – 12-inch single or extended play, 33 or 45 rpm); their reproductive quality or level of fidelity (high-fidelity, orthophonic, full-range, etc.), and the number of audio channels provided (mono, stereo, quad, etc.).

Question: What does LP stand for when it comes to time capacity?

Question: What are common diameters found in phonograph records?

Question: What is a gramophone or 'vinyl' record?

Question: Where does the groove on a vinyl record typically start?

Question: In what method is the rotational speed measured in?
Passage: The phonograph disc record was the primary medium used for music reproduction until late in the 20th century, replacing the phonograph cylinder record–with which it had co-existed from the late 1880s through to the 1920s–by the late 1920s. Records retained the largest market share even when new formats such as compact cassette were mass-marketed. By the late 1980s, digital media, in the form of the compact disc, had gained a larger market share, and the vinyl record left the mainstream in 1991. From the 1990s to the 2010s, records continued to be manufactured and sold on a much smaller scale, and were especially used by disc jockeys (DJ)s, released by artists in some genres, and listened to by a niche market of audiophiles. The phonograph record has made a niche resurgence in the early 21st century – 9.2 million records were sold in the U.S. in 2014, a 260% increase since 2009. Likewise, in the UK sales have increased five-fold from 2009 to 2014.

Question: What was the primary use of a phonographic disc record?

Question: Which year did vinyl records leave the main steam media market?

Question: From the 1990s to 2010s who was the primary consumer of vinyl records?

Question: Approximately how many phonograph records were sold in 2014?

Question: What is the niche market of phonograph record fans known as?
Passage: The phonautograph, patented by Léon Scott in 1857, used a vibrating diaphragm and stylus to graphically record sound waves as tracings on sheets of paper, purely for visual analysis and without any intent of playing them back. In the 2000s, these tracings were first scanned by audio engineers and digitally converted into audible sound. Phonautograms of singing and speech made by Scott in 1860 were played back as sound for the first time in 2008. Along with a tuning fork tone and unintelligible snippets recorded as early as 1857, these are the earliest known recordings of sound.

Question: What was the original intent of the phonautograph?

Question: In what years where phonautograms converted to audible sound?

Question: What year were the earliest known recordings of sound?

Question: By whom was the phonautograms patented?

Question: In what year was phonautograms patented?
Passage: In 1877, Thomas Edison invented the phonograph. Unlike the phonautograph, it was capable of both recording and reproducing sound. Despite the similarity of name, there is no documentary evidence that Edison's phonograph was based on Scott's phonautograph. Edison first tried recording sound on a wax-impregnated paper tape, with the idea of creating a "telephone repeater" analogous to the telegraph repeater he had been working on. Although the visible results made him confident that sound could be physically recorded and reproduced, his notes do not indicate that he actually reproduced sound before his first experiment in which he used tinfoil as a recording medium several months later. The tinfoil was wrapped around a grooved metal cylinder and a sound-vibrated stylus indented the tinfoil while the cylinder was rotated. The recording could be played back immediately. The Scientific American article that introduced the tinfoil phonograph to the public mentioned Marey, Rosapelly and Barlow as well as Scott as creators of devices for recording but, importantly, not reproducing sound. Edison also invented variations of the phonograph that used tape and disc formats. Numerous applications for the phonograph were envisioned, but although it enjoyed a brief vogue as a startling novelty at public demonstrations, the tinfoil phonograph proved too crude to be put to any practical use. A decade later, Edison developed a greatly improved phonograph that used a hollow wax cylinder instead of a foil sheet. This proved to be both a better-sounding and far more useful and durable device. The wax phonograph cylinder created the recorded sound market at the end of the 1880s and dominated it through the early years of the 20th century.

Question: In what year did Thomas Edison invent the phonograph?

Question: How did the phonograph differ from the phonautograph?

Question: What was unique about Einsteins invention?

Question: At what era was the recorded sound market introduced?
Passage: Lateral-cut disc records were developed in the United States by Emile Berliner, who named his system the "gramophone", distinguishing it from Edison's wax cylinder "phonograph" and Columbia's wax cylinder "graphophone". Berliner's earliest discs, first marketed in 1889, but only in Europe, were 5 inches (13 cm) in diameter, and were played with a small hand-propelled machine. Both the records and the machine were adequate only for use as a toy or curiosity, due to the limited sound quality. In the United States in 1894, under the Berliner Gramophone trademark, Berliner started marketing records with somewhat more substantial entertainment value, along with somewhat more substantial gramophones to play them. Berliner's records had poor sound quality compared to wax cylinders, but his manufacturing associate Eldridge R. Johnson eventually improved the sound quality. Abandoning Berliner's "Gramophone" trademark for legal reasons, in 1901 Johnson's and Berliner's separate companies reorganized to form the Victor Talking Machine Company, whose products would come to dominate the market for many years. Emile Berliner moved his company to Montreal in 1900. The factory which became RCA Victor stills exists. There is a dedicated museum in Montreal for Berliner.

Question: What is the name of lateral cut disc records?

Question: What was an issue found with Berliner's records initially?

Question: Where were lateral cut disc records developed?

Question: What is 'Victor Talking Machine now known as?

Question: Where is the museum dedicated to Berliner located?
Passage: In 1901, 10-inch disc records were introduced, followed in 1903 by 12-inch records. These could play for more than three and four minutes respectively, while contemporary cylinders could only play for about two minutes. In an attempt to head off the disc advantage, Edison introduced the Amberol cylinder in 1909, with a maximum playing time of 4½ minutes (at 160 rpm), which in turn were superseded by Blue Amberol Records, which had a playing surface made of celluloid, a plastic, which was far less fragile. Despite these improvements, during the 1910s discs decisively won this early format war, although Edison continued to produce new Blue Amberol cylinders for an ever-dwindling customer base until late in 1929. By 1919 the basic patents for the manufacture of lateral-cut disc records had expired, opening the field for countless companies to produce them. Analog disc records would dominate the home entertainment market until they were outsold by the digital compact disc in the late 1980s (which was in turn supplanted by digital audio recordings distributed via online music stores and Internet file sharing).

Question: What was the name of the discs Edison introduced in 1909?

Question: What year did the patent for lateral cut discs expire?

Question: What format dominated the market in the late 1980s?

Question: What disc format was the least fragile prior to 1919?

Question: What was the playing surface of the blue amerbol cylinder discs made of?