16-11-2019, 10:33 PM
(This post was last modified: 16-11-2019, 10:45 PM by Torsten.
Edit Reason: typo
)
(16-11-2019, 09:39 PM)ReneZ wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.One can compute the correlation coefficient for any set of data without any assumption on their distribution.
You have done exactly the same. Counts are bounded as [0, N] and are nowhere similar to being normally distributed.
You obviously didn't understand my comment (see You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.). Moreover, it is one of the stunning facts for the VMS that the word length distribution matches almost perfectly a binomial distribution (see You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.).
(16-11-2019, 09:39 PM)ReneZ wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.By comparing the correlation for 'counts' and the correlation for 'percentages', as has been done in this thread, one can see the influence of the page size. This is precisely what has demonstrated that for this particular, and quite interesting, word pair, only the biological section has a significant positive correlation.
Exactly, "the effect is stronger on pages containing more text" (You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.).
(16-11-2019, 09:39 PM)ReneZ wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.This is precisely what has demonstrated that for this particular, and quite interesting, word pair, only the biological section has a significant positive correlation.
Keep in mind that Prescott H. Currier used the positive correlation for "final 'dy'" to distinguish between Currier A and B. This also includes <chedy> and <shedy>. Currier wrote in 1976:
"The Herbal Section contains both Language 'A' and 'B.' The principal differences between the two 'languages' in this Section are:
(a) Final 'dy' is very high in Language 'B'; almost non-existent in Language 'A.'
..." (Currier 1976).
Currier described this differences as "Suffice it to say, the differences are obvious and statistically significant" (You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.).
Moreover, by "reordering the sections with respect to the frequency of token <chedy> replaces the seemingly irregular mixture of two separate languages by the gradual evolution of a single system from 'state A' to 'state B.'" (Timm & Schinner 2019, p. 7).
You even mentioned yourself the fact that the distribution of <chedy> and <shedy> allows us to identify specific sections in the MS.