Gamera

Different subject matter, different audiences, different influences, intellectual development.

Ben C Smith

Gamera and Ted, I would be interested in your opinion of an online Science News article that discusses stylometry.

Ben.

TedM

Thanks for the link. It definitely presents a case for the value of stylometry in determining probable authorship under certain conditions. It seems that those conditions are becoming more and more defined as time goes on. We can't tell from the article whether they know enough yet or will EVER be able to know enough to say that the conditions exist for the Pastorals. It isn't clear to me that the various studies have compared works by one author to two very different audiences, for example. And, Titus fails the 1000 word test (barely), with 921 words. 2Timothy has 1703 words and 1 Timothy has 2209, both fairly low. I wonder what the current general opinion of stylometric experts would be with regard to the combination of the word counts and different audiences for the Pastorals?

That being said, I would think that there might be some value in applying these more refined techniques to a comparison of the 3 to each other, and a comparison to works like Acts and Luke. Though Acts and Luke aren't personal letters like the Pastorals, IF they compare significantly more favorably than to Paul's letters, I would think that is worthy of consideration.

ted

Ben C Smith

It would seem to me that analyzing the more common words (like but and upon) at least partially negates the effect writing to two different audiences might have. But I am no expert, and may well be mistaken.

I would add that, even with the most refined technique, I would use stylometry only as a single (though perhaps confirming) plank in the argument. It is instructive that the stylometric analyses described in that article usually served to confirm what were already viable hypotheses for other reasons. I do not think stylometry would be as effective flying solo.

Ben.

Gamera

Thanks for the link, Ben. An interesting article.

Notice this method by its own terms would not be applicable to Titus and Philemon, since both are under 1,000 words. Also, query if given possible redactions, stylometrics is inappropriate to the entire body of Pauline works by its own terms.

But leaving these quibbles aside, I think the main issue is the usage of stylometrics. The article gives examples of usage that make sense. What the examples involved were situations where the authorship of a body of works was known. The stylistic elements could be analyzed. Based on this analysis, a work or works whose authorship was in doubt can be compared. In the examples the styles matched within certain variances (query what the basis of those variances is). The proponents then concluded that the compared work was in fact by the same author, or at least that it is more likely that it was by that author as opposed to some other author whose style was analyzed statistically.

Fine. That seems like a credible use of stylometrics (though I'm still leery about the variances). But this is not the usage proposed by stylometric analysis of the Pastorals. There, stylometrics is purportedly used to disprove authorship, to exclude the possibility that this work was written by the same author as another work. That's a different kettle of fish. To use stylometrics to exclude (rather than confirm) authorship, you would have to study the level and types of differences that count as indicia for different authorship, both generally and in a culture specific setting. That hasn't been done, near as I can tell. So while the usage of stylometrics in the articles seems grounded in logic, the usage discussed in this thread doesn't. It's a nonsequitur without the attendant studies showing the level and types of difference that one expects from different authorship.

Gamera

By the way, if Shakespeare wrote the Spanish Tragedy, I'll eat my shirt. It's a primitive work. Let's hope stylometrics is wrong and he didn't.