[Humanist] 26.536 on computational stylistics & so much more

[Humanist Discussion Group]

                 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/