Nor am I persuaded by Kirk Lowery's suggestion that new Ph. Both of those are things that I have and continue to devote time to but that does not mean that they are essential components for a PhD in the humanities. I hear Faulhaber's request as a call to create tools that allow humanities scholars to use the results of our labors without serving as apprentices in areas removed from their main subject matter interests. Morphological, syntactic information and comparative materials are available through other menu options. The program dynamically updates the information that can be the subject of searches or analysis based upon the information provided by the scholar.
Statistical analysis is also available through a set of menu options.
Working very close to the metal to build such an application, one would need to know all manner of technology not strictly relevant to mastery of the subject matter material. But the non-computing humanist Hebrew scholar should not have to care whether I can used SGML's concur, TexMECS or some other markup technology to encode the textual variants. That knowledge is useful to help add to the construction of such tools but it should not be a green card to access the fruits of our labors. I think what you all do and describe is a pragmatics of computing where you know how to pragmatically assemble what you need to get to where you need or want to try and get to. I asked a colleague how to do this.