The iteration marks 々, ヽ, ヾ, ゝ, ゞ are slightly smaller than standard kana, and are often seen in print when a contemporary scholar is transcribing text, a printmaker's seal, etc. My question relates to the kunojiten (くの字点, くのじてん), either the 〱 (unvoiced) or 〲 (voiced) repeat marks that resemble the hiragana characters ku (く) and gu (ぐ). Given they are only used in vertical text, stretching to fill the space usually occupied by two kanji characters, what is the best solution if you are TRANSCRIBING them from pre-20th century documents and cartouches, typing them up?
Perhaps this is a little bit of a style question... might one write:
摂州大物の浦よしつねしう〲難風... and risk a reader thinking 〲 is gu ぐ
摂州大物の浦よしつねしう〲[じう]難風... i.e., interpolate in square brackets
摂州大物の浦よしつねしう[じう]難風... interpolate in square brackets with no reference to 〲
or simply transcribe as
摂州大物の浦よしつねしうじう難風... with no reference to there having been a kunojiten present?
My reference from a cartouche: 摂州大物の浦よしつねしう[kunojiten]難風に出合て平家のぼうれい御船を覆さんとする圖
or with accompanying furigana in the cartouche: 摂州[せっしゅう]大物の浦よしつねしう[kunojiten]難[なん]風に出合て平家のぼうれい御船を覆[くつがえ]さんとする圖, Sesshū Daimotsu-no-ura Yoshitsune shiujiu [shūjū] nanpū ni deaite Heike no bōrei mifune wo kutsugae san to suru zu.
Essentially, is there a consistent and/or best practice for transcribing or transliterating kunojiten in printed text?
Shiujiu (しう〲, thus しうじう), appears to be a more archaic way to write shūjū (しゅうじゅう) or shujū (しゅじゅう), a "master and servant" or "lord and retainer." Shūjū/shujū is sometimes seen in kanji form (主従) but it's usually seen Shiujiu (しう followed by the kunojiten) in 19th century prints. The dictionaries I have access to (at present) don't bring up the spelling Shiujiu... not quite sure when it changed, and the historical relationship/shift of 'iu' to 'ū'.