02-07-2026, 01:12 PM
I too have difficulty understanding your claim.
But also when you are doing an analysis on repeat words then it would help to enumerate the repeats. I have done this for you, for quires 13 and 20. See attached.
In particular you will see:
We do know that there is a difference in the words and language of the sections of the manuscript and that this will probably affect the frequency of repeats. In particular quire 13 has a smaller corpus of words [ see You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. ]. Moreover, the number of repeats over and above what could be expected is so low that I doubt that any analysis will lead to any definite conclusion.
But also when you are doing an analysis on repeat words then it would help to enumerate the repeats. I have done this for you, for quires 13 and 20. See attached.
In particular you will see:
- In quire 13 the frequency of word pairs that are repeats is 1.1%. For quire 20 it is 0.6%. Roughly a halving.
- In quire 13 ol is the top word ( 299, 4.2% of words ). The number of ol ol repeats is 12 and this is nearly the same as the expected number if words were distributed randomly ( 299 x 4.2% = 13 ). qokedy repeats 11 times, 4 would be expected. qokeedy, observed 9, expected 3.
- In quire 20 aiin is the top word ( 322, 2.73% ) but it does not repeat. 9 would be expected. qokeedy, observed 11, expected 1. qokeey, observed 9, expected 2. ar, observed 8, expected 4.
We do know that there is a difference in the words and language of the sections of the manuscript and that this will probably affect the frequency of repeats. In particular quire 13 has a smaller corpus of words [ see You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view. ]. Moreover, the number of repeats over and above what could be expected is so low that I doubt that any analysis will lead to any definite conclusion.