Independent Analysis Identifying Languages Beyond Currier A/ B, compared to René Zand

[npcompl33t]

The second is that the selected bigrams could completely miss large outliers, for example, as is the case with f58.

The frequency of "al" alone should set f58 apart: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.

Nick Pelling wrote about the peculiarities of f58: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.

Yes, I 100% agree, which is why I was surprised that Rene didn't identify it despite using -al as a part of his classification scheme for his 'C' grouping.

I have read that thread before and in fact, it is one of the reasons I decided to make this post at all. The thread's premise is that f58 is an 'intermediate' language, and marco P shows the PCA bigram chart that seems to show f58 in the middle of A and B sections.

However, that chart is showing only the 1st and 2nd dimensions, which together only capture something like 20% of the total variance. The issue is that the PCA is attempting to explain variance across the entire manuscript, and since f58 is only 2 pages, the features that distinguish it don't rank as high. Checking the 3rd dimension alone shows that it is not really 'in between' A and B, but rather off on its own.