Tutorial anonymus translators (en): Unterschied zwischen den Versionen
Aus Kallimachos
| Zeile 40: | Zeile 40: | ||
Once the texts are finally in an adjusted txt-format, the actual stylometric analysis can begin. The dataset can be devided in two groups, one with known and one with unknown translators. It´s important to keep up with the current state of research in this regard. When in doubt, the translation should rather be marked as "anonymus". For our research, we only accepted unambigous attributions found in the incipits and colophones of the manuscripts as reliable and marked all other texts as anonymous translations. | Once the texts are finally in an adjusted txt-format, the actual stylometric analysis can begin. The dataset can be devided in two groups, one with known and one with unknown translators. It´s important to keep up with the current state of research in this regard. When in doubt, the translation should rather be marked as "anonymus". For our research, we only accepted unambigous attributions found in the incipits and colophones of the manuscripts as reliable and marked all other texts as anonymous translations. | ||
The corpus can be anylized with (at least) two different methods: By looking at words that are used exclusively by one of the known translators and by computerized analysis of the most frequent words (MFW) of a text. The first method has been developed at Würzburg University, the second is based on ''Burrows Delta'' (Burrows 2002). | |||
===(I) | ===(I) Exclusive Words=== | ||
Experience has shown that anonymous translators can be identified by looking at frequently used words, that are used exclusively by a single known translators and that are not dependent on the text´s discipline. As an example, Dominicus Gundisalvi is the only translator wo uses 'sic ut, vel est, cuius comparatio, opus fuit, id per quod, id autem quod'' and ''omnis quod est'', which can be also found in the anonymous translation of Alexander of Aphrodisias‘ ''De intellectu'' – a strong indication for Gundisalvi as the actual translator of the tractate. Getting there is a two-step process: | |||
# | #The first step is searching for frequent terms that are used exclusively by a single translator. To this end, programing a simple search enginge is advisable. When filtering the word lists, flexible parameters can help to set a minimal frequency or the amount of texts that have to contain the word in question. To analyze word groups, the texts can be split into lists of n-grams (i.e. overlapping sequences of multiple words). Thus, the list of exclusive words can be reduced to typical and frequently used terms, f.i. words that appear at least in 10 works of the translator and in 40% of his translations. As an example, the term ''iterum quia'' appears in 4 of the 10 translations by Gerhards of Cremona in our philosophical corpus, where they are used a total of 56 times. Thus, ''iterum quia'' is both an exclusive and frequently used term in Gerhards work. Following a possible suspicion for a a false attribution, an additional parameter for error tolerance can be employded, admitting also words, that are used very rarely by other translators. | ||
# | #In a second step, this list has to be filtered for content words specific to the text´s discipline, like ''substantia composita'' oder ''horoscopus''. The remaining words a stilistic words in a more narrow sense, i.e. words that can be used in all scientific latin texts of this perios in principle. These may contain not only conjunctions and other particle words, but also words and phrases like ''examinatio'', ''annullare'' or ''demonstrare voluimus''. This focus is important, as experience has shown that content words are adopted by other translators more easily, whereas stilistic words and phrases appear more stable for one author only. | ||
Subsequently, you can note for each anonymously translated text in the corpus which of these words appear in the text. If negative and positive evidence fit – meaning when a bunch of words exclusive to a single translator appear in the text (positive) and at the same time no exclusive words of other translators (negative), the attribution of the text to the known translator is quite certain. | |||
For very short texts, it my be advisibale to expand the analysis to less frequent words. However, in this case, the less frequent words of other translators have to be compared as well. Experience shows, that only a huge amassment of these less typical words and phrases in an anonymously translated text allow for a credible attribution. | |||
===(II) Computergestützte Stilometrie mit ''Burrows Delta''=== | ===(II) Computergestützte Stilometrie mit ''Burrows Delta''=== | ||