23-04-2026, 08:46 AM
Unfortunately I am not convinced of your conclusion. Let me try to give some explanation for the difference in your figures for 'ch o_rate' ( 14.6%. 20.3% ).
If you take any section of the manuscript you will see that the distribution of gallows words is not uniform. In particular the distribution in quire 13 is 8 standard deviations away from what would be expected if gallows words were distributed randomly. The swing is from 35% ( You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. ) to 60% ( You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. ). ( Quire 13 is known to have the most consistent writing and therefore is the best section for doing analysis such as this. ) The gallows distribution for quire 20 is 10 standard deviations away. ( Together quires 13 and 20 have 52% of the total words. )
So some pages have more gallows words and others less and the deviation is statistically significant.
Moreover look at the positioning of gallows words within lines in the manuscript. It seems to be generally uniform. So therefore because of the uneven distribution across the pages it follows that if a line starts with a gallows word it will probably be followed by a greater than average frequency of gallows words. Likewise a starting no-gallow word will probably be followed by a less than average frequency.
Now to 'ch o_rate'. Words that start ch tend to be non-gallows words. Words that start o tend to be gallows words. So this all might explains some the higher 'without' value for ch o_rate.
The same logic might explains the higher 'with' figure for your 't gallow_density'.
Uneven distribution of gallows words within the pages of the manuscript is biasing your figures.
If you take any section of the manuscript you will see that the distribution of gallows words is not uniform. In particular the distribution in quire 13 is 8 standard deviations away from what would be expected if gallows words were distributed randomly. The swing is from 35% ( You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. ) to 60% ( You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. ). ( Quire 13 is known to have the most consistent writing and therefore is the best section for doing analysis such as this. ) The gallows distribution for quire 20 is 10 standard deviations away. ( Together quires 13 and 20 have 52% of the total words. )
So some pages have more gallows words and others less and the deviation is statistically significant.
Moreover look at the positioning of gallows words within lines in the manuscript. It seems to be generally uniform. So therefore because of the uneven distribution across the pages it follows that if a line starts with a gallows word it will probably be followed by a greater than average frequency of gallows words. Likewise a starting no-gallow word will probably be followed by a less than average frequency.
Now to 'ch o_rate'. Words that start ch tend to be non-gallows words. Words that start o tend to be gallows words. So this all might explains some the higher 'without' value for ch o_rate.
The same logic might explains the higher 'with' figure for your 't gallow_density'.
Uneven distribution of gallows words within the pages of the manuscript is biasing your figures.