A note about separators:
In general, I've tried to separate Coptic morphemes with small dots. It is important to realize that these do not represent anything occurring in the original text. There are approximately 500 separators in the Coptic text, of varying shapes and sizes. I have used the apostrophe to represent all of these, even where the Coptic separator looks like a dot. Wherever the original Coptic text has an inter-morpheme separator (as opposed to an inter-word separator), I have used both the dot and apostrophe. In the more remarkable cases where the original Coptic has an intra-morpheme separator, I have used the apostrophe only. (Warning: Coptic morpheme-separation is an inexact art: some anomalies are unavoidable.)

A note about abbreviations in the English:
The English translation of a Coptic word or phrase is often very much longer than the Coptic. In order to retain the Coptic line structure, it was necessary to use some abbreviations in the English translation. Some of these are natural, others not. In the case of the name 'Jesus', the Coptic original already uses the abbreviations 'IC' and 'IHC' (with superlinear strokes) for 'IHCOYC', making it natural to use 'JS' and 'JES' for the English equivalents, thus keeping the number of letters in the English morpheme the same as in the Coptic. (An added benefit of this particular abbreviation is that it serves as a corrective to the natural tendency to ignore what is actually before us, in favor of what we believe must be before us.)
(For further details, see the Dictionary of Abbreviations.)

A note about sayings numbers:
Every English translation of Thomas with which I am familiar, is organized by sayings numbers, or logoi. I have included these in the text for reference purposes only, but I must warn the reader that these numbers do not appear to be any help at all as indicators of the hidden structure of Thomas. In fact, they probably do more harm than good, in that they tend to obscure some divisions in the text, and to suggest others that are not in fact present. Because of this, I am debating as to whether to remove them entirely. The reader's viewpoint on this issue would be greatly appreciated.

A note about the font:
The font I am currently using is coptic2.ttf, available for free from The Yamada Language Institute at the University of Oregon. Although I like it for its simplicity, and have been able to get around its limitations, the use of it does require many manual operations. If the reader can direct me to a better non-ornate font, please do! -MWG