[Humanist] 25.229 saying one thing meaning another? accuracy of double keying?

Humanist Discussion Group willard.mccarty at mccarty.org.uk
Thu Aug 11 00:49:00 CEST 2011


                 Humanist Discussion Group, Vol. 25, No. 229.
            Department of Digital Humanities, King's College London
                       www.digitalhumanities.org/humanist
                Submit to: humanist at lists.digitalhumanities.org

  [1]   From:    Willard McCarty <willard.mccarty at mccarty.org.uk>          (27)
        Subject: saying other than we mean

  [2]   From:    Christian Thomas <thomas at bbaw.de>                         (22)
        Subject: Verifying the Accuracy of Double Keying - any studies?


--[1]------------------------------------------------------------------------
        Date: Wed, 10 Aug 2011 09:12:49 +1000
        From: Willard McCarty <willard.mccarty at mccarty.org.uk>
        Subject: saying other than we mean

"Lost in translation: emergency staff don't listen properly". Julie 
Robotham, The Sydney Morning Herald, 10 August 2011, page 1.

In response to the allegation from which the title of this front-page 
article was derived, Diana Slade, professor of applied linguistics, 
University of Technology Sydney (who did a study of emergency-room 
interchanges), said, among other things,

> What people think they are saying is very different from what they
> actually say. I'm not being critical at all of the doctors and
> nurses. It's a system issue.

Actually, I would think, it's in the nature of human communication to 
say other than what one means. As one palaeobiologist has recently 
argued, without the ability to deceive we would not have evolved as we 
did. But in the specific case cited in this morning's paper, this would 
seem a research project for digital discourse analysis to tackle: how do 
people in fact say that they are feeling bad in a particular part of the 
body or in a particular way? Clinical diagnosticians learn to read 
illness from patients' words, but I suspect that their knowledge of how 
to do this is tacit. Surely an enormously complex problem, but a 
fascinating one.

Comments?

Yours,
WM
-- 
Professor Willard McCarty, Department of Digital Humanities, King's
College London; Centre for Cultural Research, University of Western
Sydney; Editor, Interdisciplinary Science Reviews (www.isr-journal.org);
Editor, Humanist (www.digitalhumanities.org/humanist/); www.mccarty.org.uk/



--[2]------------------------------------------------------------------------
        Date: Wed, 10 Aug 2011 14:02:32 +0200
        From: Christian Thomas <thomas at bbaw.de>
        Subject: Verifying the Accuracy of Double Keying - any studies?

Dear colleagues,

as staff member of the Deutsches Textarchiv 
(www.deutschestextarchiv.de), I would be interested in studies on the 
accuracy of double keying, esp. in large full text, tei/xml annotated 
corpora. Service providers advertise accuracy rates of 99.+%, has anyone 
ever questioned this on an empirical basis? I have found various musings 
on OCR accuracy and on how to improve results here, but nothing similar 
on double keying. I would be grateful for any hints.

Thanks in advance,
all the best
Christian Thomas

-- 
Christian Thomas
Deutsches Textarchiv
Berlin-Brandenburgische Akademie der Wissenschaften
Jägerstr. 22/23
10117 Berlin

Raum:   359
Tel.:   +49 (0)30 20370 523
E-Mail: thomas at bbaw.de
http://www.deutschestextarchiv.de/
--





More information about the Humanist mailing list