21-12-2025, 07:06 AM
(This post was last modified: 21-12-2025, 07:07 AM by Jorge_Stolfi.)
Sorry if this has been asked before:
Can we check whether the big difference between A and B is merely a change in the spelling system?
Imagine that someone is writing in German and at some point realizes that it is silly to write "sch" and "ck", so he starts writing "sh" and "k" instead. Since the letters {s,c,h,k} occur in other combinations, this spelling change will affect the digraph frequencies in a complicated way.
If the VMS Author decided to change the spelling system, it must be because the new one is more efficient (as in the hypothetical German example above). How do the token lengths of A and B text compare?
The replacement of "od" by "ed", observed by Jacques Guy, would not save glyphs but would save pen strokes. So we can ask the same question above, but counting strokes instead of glyphs:
(Better focus just on normal text first, that is, parag and circular text. Including labels etc and pages with little text only confuses things; we can look at them later once we figure things out for normal text.)
Has anyone tried to check whether there is a systematic (or semi-systematic) mapping of the A lexicon to the B lexicon that makes one language more similar to the other one? Like, say, "replace od by ed in every word, and suppress the platform of CTh etc if it is followed by y or aiin"? (This is just an example of what a "systematic mapping" would be like; I am not proposing this specific rule.)
Beware that a mere change of subject can drastically change the frequencies of words; and hence the frequencies of digraphs, because these are determined largely by the most frequent words. For example, the word "herb" should be fairly common in a herbal (like the "alchemists herbals") but absent in an astrological text. Then the digraph "rb" should be much more common in the former than in the latter.
All the best, --stolfi
Can we check whether the big difference between A and B is merely a change in the spelling system?
Imagine that someone is writing in German and at some point realizes that it is silly to write "sch" and "ck", so he starts writing "sh" and "k" instead. Since the letters {s,c,h,k} occur in other combinations, this spelling change will affect the digraph frequencies in a complicated way.
If the VMS Author decided to change the spelling system, it must be because the new one is more efficient (as in the hypothetical German example above). How do the token lengths of A and B text compare?
The replacement of "od" by "ed", observed by Jacques Guy, would not save glyphs but would save pen strokes. So we can ask the same question above, but counting strokes instead of glyphs:
- i e n(?) = 1
- q o a y Ch Ih d m r s l k t p f = 2
- Sh = 3
- CTh CKh etc = 4
- CTHh CKHh etc = 5
(Better focus just on normal text first, that is, parag and circular text. Including labels etc and pages with little text only confuses things; we can look at them later once we figure things out for normal text.)
Has anyone tried to check whether there is a systematic (or semi-systematic) mapping of the A lexicon to the B lexicon that makes one language more similar to the other one? Like, say, "replace od by ed in every word, and suppress the platform of CTh etc if it is followed by y or aiin"? (This is just an example of what a "systematic mapping" would be like; I am not proposing this specific rule.)
Beware that a mere change of subject can drastically change the frequencies of words; and hence the frequencies of digraphs, because these are determined largely by the most frequent words. For example, the word "herb" should be fairly common in a herbal (like the "alchemists herbals") but absent in an astrological text. Then the digraph "rb" should be much more common in the former than in the latter.
All the best, --stolfi