on 50v, Marc and I removed a "z" from an "il" that had been incorrectly transcribed with a z to accord with the plural verb following it. The question was whether to add a <corr>z</corr> to the TCN. NB: we have not added that yet 50v <ups>a</ups>iguise & de ceste part<lb/> <ups>i</ups>l doibvent estre de <m>fer<lb/> fort doulx</m></ab>
BECAUSE... Marc remembers that this was a common enough problem in the manuscript (i.e, that the a-p forgot to add a "z" when he meant "ils"), but a cursory search through TCN shows that was only done twice—which seems a bit too few.
QUESTION: do we want to: a) remove all the <corr>z</corr> from TCN b) do a campaign (as part of the read-through?) checking for these and marking them up??
we found an "il divisent" on 80r in the TC, no <corr> in the TCN. Marc thinks we should just leave the TCN as transcribed, not correcting for missing s/z