Freethought & Rationalism Archive

Toto · 07-20-2011, 12:57 PM

Forbes Magazine

The author seems to think that a computer program could match Maurice Casey's retro-translated version of Mark with the Dead Sea Scrolls to determine if there was a common author.

The idea is criticized on Paleojudaica.

Quote:

Bottom line: at best Casey has produced one of many possible retroversions of the Aramaic, but it is very unlikely that it consistently represents the Aramaic traditions that Mark had before him with any precision. Casey also often has to draw on later Aramaic and Syriac, when the relevant vocabulary does not survive in our very limited resources from the first century, and this adds yet another level of speculation to his reconstructions.

Given these limitations to Casey's work, I am confident in answering that, no, application of the computer algorithm would not be able to help us detect multiple authors in the reconstructed Aramaic sources or to date them to within a decade or to falsify Casey's work. None of these things will happen unless, first, we recover a lot more actual Aramaic from the first century and, second, we develop retroversion techniques that are far more sophisticated than the ones Casey uses. I wouldn't count on either happening any time soon, if ever.

There is more on the computer algorithm here

hjalti · 07-20-2011, 01:02 PM

Quote:

The author seems to think that a computer program could match Maurice Casey's retro-translated version of Mark with the Dead Sea Scrolls to determine if there was a common author.

I find your non-lack of faith in Casey disturbing. :-/

avi · 07-20-2011, 02:43 PM

Thank you Toto, surely food for thought, good citation, we need more like this, excellent work, uncovering this internet post....

Quote:

Originally Posted by John Farrell at Paleojudaica dot net

For example, comparing a carefully retro-translated Aramaic Mark with the larger sample of the Dead Sea Scrolls.

What might such an analysis reveal? Would it suggest more than one author?

Or might it falsify the whole proposition, in spite of Casey’s thesis? emphasis by avi

No, John, it may invalidate, or repudiate, or refute "the whole proposition" (though I doubt that conclusion), but under only one circumstance would it "falsify" the entire travail, and that peculiar situation would arise only when someone deliberately sought to introduce, fraudulently, information designed to render the analysis invalid. Please be careful with word choice when discussing biblical analysis, since, for many of us, who are computer literate, the entire corpus of ancient literature reeks of political intrigue, deception, fraud, and forgery. It is precisely in this hostile, cluttered, unkempt environment that the algorithm must function correctly, honestly, accurately, with a very high index of approval, certainly not in the "80%" range.

Quote:

The method of the algorithm is primarily based on word choice within a composite document. To test out the algorithm, the team created a composite document out of the books of Ezekial and Jeremiah, then took the combined document through their algorithm. The result was a very high accuracy level of classification of the disparate texts–a little over 80%.

This is remarkably poor quality research, in my opinion. First of all, we have no idea who wrote "Ezekial", nor "Jeremiah". We don't know if it was one person, or a hundred. We know nothing of the revision history. Unless they were using DSS, not LXX, they would not even be using authentic Jewish documents, since, in my opinion, the LXX is an obvious forgery and fraudulent document. Further, I am unclear about the effect of LXX on the copying of conventional Hebrew documents, placed in the caves at Qumran, in Jordan, a couple thousand years ago....

One must not employ unknowns in creating standards, and particularly not in creating testing protocols for identifying standards' behaviour. This is sort of fundamental abc's of science. Does Moshe Koppel's algorithm examine handwriting, or word order, or sentence structure, or frequency tables? Is the Great Isaiah scroll regarded as having been authored (not copied) by a single man?

avi

mountainman · 07-20-2011, 08:23 PM

What source language is being analysed? I did a search on all the linked articles and did not find the word "Greek".

yalla · 07-20-2011, 08:58 PM

Somebody has done something similar to this.
I've got a tiny bell in the back of my mind tingling gently as I try to recall who, what etc.
I seem to recall a statistical analysis of the words used in a some biblical or NT works to try and shed light on authorship.
I reckon it may have ben something to do with comparative analysis of the language of the "Pauline" epistle but I may be mistaken. I further seem to recall it was the subject of a thread or two here some years ago, say 4 or 5 very roughly.

I'll try to get the memory banks back in action.

mountainman · 07-21-2011, 06:15 AM

KJV?

Toto · 07-21-2011, 08:40 AM

Thread from the archives: Computer software for determining interpolations?

JonA · 07-21-2011, 09:32 AM

Relying on computer analysis alone is never a good thing.

The analysis will either reinforce present understanding or provide reasons for questioning the present understanding.

But entirely new understandings should never rest on computer analysis alone.

Jon

07-20-2011, 08:23 PM	#4
mountainman Contributor Join Date: Mar 2006 Location: Falls Creek, Oz. Posts: 11,192	Isn't Greek the source language of the new testament and LXX Bibles? What source language is being analysed? I did a search on all the linked articles and did not find the word "Greek".

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

07-20-2011, 08:58 PM	#5
yalla Veteran Member Join Date: May 2002 Location: oz Posts: 1,848	Somebody has done something similar to this. I've got a tiny bell in the back of my mind tingling gently as I try to recall who, what etc. I seem to recall a statistical analysis of the words used in a some biblical or NT works to try and shed light on authorship. I reckon it may have ben something to do with comparative analysis of the language of the "Pauline" epistle but I may be mistaken. I further seem to recall it was the subject of a thread or two here some years ago, say 4 or 5 very roughly. I'll try to get the memory banks back in action.

07-21-2011, 06:15 AM	#6
mountainman Contributor Join Date: Mar 2006 Location: Falls Creek, Oz. Posts: 11,192	KJV?

07-21-2011, 08:40 AM	#7
Toto Contributor Join Date: Jun 2000 Location: Los Angeles area Posts: 40,549	Thread from the archives: Computer software for determining interpolations?

07-21-2011, 09:32 AM	#8
JonA Regular Member Join Date: May 2011 Location: Minnesota! Posts: 386	Relying on computer analysis alone is never a good thing. The analysis will either reinforce present understanding or provide reasons for questioning the present understanding. But entirely new understandings should never rest on computer analysis alone. Jon

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.