Recent revival of the Currier A vs B discussion by Julian led me to the following idea.
1. Take all Currier A folios and Currier B folios.
2. Any folios not clearly belonging to A or B are left aside.
3. Any folios featuring distinct successive blocks of A and B are divided in such blocks and included into the respective subsets of item 1.
4. This way one has the "A" subcorpus and the "B" subcorpus.
5. Find all vords occurring only once in the "A" subcorpus. Exclude any vords that occur only once in the VMS on the whole.
6. Find all vords occurring only once in the "B" subcorpus. Exclude any vords that occur only once in the VMS on the whole.
7. Compare the results of items 6 and 7.
The degree of overlapping between the two resulting sets will allow to make conclusions as to the roots of the difference between A and B. No (or little) overlapping will speak towards different underlay languages or different procedures applied to the same underlay language.
What do you think? Could anyone please do the check?
1. Take all Currier A folios and Currier B folios.
2. Any folios not clearly belonging to A or B are left aside.
3. Any folios featuring distinct successive blocks of A and B are divided in such blocks and included into the respective subsets of item 1.
4. This way one has the "A" subcorpus and the "B" subcorpus.
5. Find all vords occurring only once in the "A" subcorpus. Exclude any vords that occur only once in the VMS on the whole.
6. Find all vords occurring only once in the "B" subcorpus. Exclude any vords that occur only once in the VMS on the whole.
7. Compare the results of items 6 and 7.
The degree of overlapping between the two resulting sets will allow to make conclusions as to the roots of the difference between A and B. No (or little) overlapping will speak towards different underlay languages or different procedures applied to the same underlay language.
What do you think? Could anyone please do the check?