Saulnier |
|
| CITAZIONE (Teodoro Studita @ 7/3/2016, 20:01) Ok. Assuming that PT is not homogeneous to Book X...Did these chunks of Book X show the same behavior of other 3k char. cutpaste of other Plinian works from the Letters corpus? In other words, maybe the problem is not PT but Book X? The method proposed by Potha and Stamatatos is a profile based method. By constructing a composite author-profile for Pliny, combining the book 10 letters, I wind up with a construct that includes all the book 10 letters (Ep.96.10 included), considering only those characteristics (the most frequent n-grams) useful to catch the Pliny’s profile in book 10. Are you asking if I have tried to compare other Plinian 3000 char (not from book 10) with the Pliny’s profile in book 10? Or if I have tried to compare the 15 Plinian chunks of book 10 with the Pliny’s profile in books 1-9? From the stylistic analysis of Pliny’s correspondence by Gamberini, it’s clear that book 10 is markedly different from books 1-9 of Pliny’s letters and in fact Pliny’s fragments from Book 10 have high value of SPI (as one should expect), only Ep.96.10 shows values low or very low. Of course with a profile based method the comparisons between each of the samples (of 3000 char) with each of the others, has little or no sense. In fact we cannot apply a profile based method without having a profile (due to its short length, it is not possible to extract a profile from a single Plinian fragment). |
| | |
