25-06-2025, 12:37 PM
(25-06-2025, 11:21 AM)oshfdk wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.How to you define significant? I see numbers like 0.11 and 2.47 and 4.24, etc, this is difference up to 8 times the expected number.
There are empty slots. Which means the count is zero, I suppose. Like for Shekeedy, which could be made of Shek (count 53) and eedy (count 612). But somehow it's not there. How likely is that?
The fact that the ratios hover around the parity mark for the most frequent parts is good enough. You have to allow for the fact that it is the author's choice and that at each sitting they may have different ideas how to write. One great thing about the construction hypothesis is that there are no binding rules about the writing and this can explain the various oddities in the text.
0.11, 2.47 and 4.24 are for chekeey qolkeedy ykeeody which occur 1, 6 and 6 times. Their expected counts are 9, 3, 2. With such low counts you can't really expect to get unity between observed and expected.
Also chekeey occurs once. 9 were expected. But I suspect that words that include eke are going to be underrepresented since I suspect that the authors would instead have preferred to write this as the one character ckh.
The expected count for Shekeedy is 5. Because of the small number and because of my suspicions about ckh most probably it was never destined that the author should write this word.