From: pierce@spop.navo.navy.mil (Jim M. Pierce)
Subject: Re: writing Re: The Nightstalker makes an observation
Nntp-Posting-Host-[nntpd-27855]: spop.navo.navy.mil
Reply-To: pierce@navo.navy.mil (Jim M. Pierce)
Organization: POPS Operations I/O Operator
Date: Sat, 25 Jul 1992 17:31:19 GMT

In article <1992Jul25.161020.27585@midway.uchicago.edu>, mss2@quads.uchicago.edu (Michael S. Schiffer) writes:
|> In article <1992Jul25.144410.4247@cs.tulane.edu> pierce@navo.navy.mil (Jim M. Pierce) writes:
|> >    I took a Bibical Archaology class last year. The professor told us that
|> >  there were computer programs that could pick out a writing style. Thats
|> >  how researchers know that numerous people wrote what we thought were
|> >  Shakespeare's plays and also how we know that three people wrote the book
|> >  of Genesis. A woman wrote most of it, with two men contributing some
|> >  writing to it. I belive he said they used original Aramaic manuscripts
|> >  from some era. Sorry I don't remember exact dates, its possible they used
|> >  the Dead Sea Scrolls, but I am not certain. And yes, the information that
|> >  a woman wrote most of the book of Genesis upset several people in that
|> >  classroom.
|> 
|> 	"My understanding is that saying `we know' the aforementioned
|> things is ascribing a bit more certainty to the computer methods
|> referred to than is really appropriate.  Even leaving aside the
|> Biblical questions, I'm _certain_ that the claim that Shakespeare was
|> written by multiple authors is not free of controversy or even
|> generally accepted-- at most, it's a theory accepted by a minority of
|> scholars.  I've seen some discussion of programs like the ones
|> described, and the accuracy of the models used was pretty hotly
|> debated at last check.  I haven't studied the matter in detail, but
|> the first thing I'd want to know is how well these programs do in
|> distinguishing the writing styles of current authors, particularly
|> authors who vary their styles or attempt to emulate others (since
|> Shakespeare very likely varied his own in response to the source
|> material he was using).  I'd also want to know what basis they'd use
|> for determining the gender of an author-- particularly in a culture
|> where the compilation in question forms a major part of the source
|> material for determining _anything_ about writing styles.
 
      "Well, he did say that some people didn't accept the Genesis multiple
   authorship, but that the programs had been checked on quite a few
   modern authors as a cross-check. He also said that while a 'woman
   writing Genesis' was controversial, the evidence was the writing style
   of women common to the era that the writing was dated to. Lets see, on
   Shakespeare, he did say that some Literature Organizations didn't
   believe it, but he had seen the proofs and believed them. He also
   mentioned that while many people who read the proofs for both did
   believe that the modern writings were accurately prooved, that the
   older writings were onlt prooved for about half of the people who read
   the proofs. So, either the proofs of older writings only convenced about
   half of the people who read the proofs or they couldn't accept the
   proofs. I don't know myself, I haven't seen the proofs." DJ.

     well, back to skating... 

    Oh, the Professor had degrees in both Archaology and computer science.
    I don't think he ran the programs himself, I believe he was just
    informing his class on some research he had read. Jim.
-- 
jmpierce%usmcp6.bitnet@vm.tcs.tulane.edu <- guaranteed there Wed. only !
Disclaimer: Standard. Recent Album: Muddy Waters:Muddy Waters Live 
Newsgroups: alt.callahans