[Humanist] 26.536 on computational stylistics & so much more
Humanist Discussion Group
willard.mccarty at mccarty.org.uk
Fri Nov 30 08:03:05 CET 2012
Humanist Discussion Group, Vol. 26, No. 536.
Department of Digital Humanities, King's College London
www.dhhumanist.org/
Submit to: humanist at lists.digitalhumanities.org
Date: Thu, 29 Nov 2012 11:39:57 +0000
From: Willard McCarty <willard.mccarty at mccarty.org.uk>
Subject: computational stylistics
Some here, possibly (as I hope) many, will profit greatly from an
article that has just appeared in Shakespeare Quarterly 63.3 (Fall
2012), John Burrows, "A Second Opinion on 'Shakespeare and Authorship
Studies in the Twenty-First Century', pp. 355-92. It is a reply to a
review article by Brian Vickers as referenced, in SQ 62 (2011): 106-42.
For someone like myself who does not follow Shakespeare studies closely
the great value of Burrows' article is its thorough exposition of
computational stylistics for the non-specialist. For those who are not
concerned with that specialism, its importance is as groundwork to the
mounting evidence, as Burrows has written elsewhere, that literary style
is probabilistic. And that, in my opinion, should have us all pondering
what we think our human nature is. But here I verge on a long and
complex argument not suitable to the brief exchanges in this medium. I'm
working on getting this argument published, but for now I must leave you
with your own conclusions about the emerging probabilistic evidence.
Comments?
Yours,
WM
--
Willard McCarty, FRAI / Professor of Humanities Computing & Director of
the Doctoral Programme, Department of Digital Humanities, King's College
London; Professor, School of Computing, Engineering and Mathematics,
University of Western Sydney; Editor, Interdisciplinary Science Reviews
(www.isr-journal.org); Editor, Humanist
(www.digitalhumanities.org/humanist/); www.mccarty.org.uk/
More information about the Humanist
mailing list