...
首页> 外文期刊>Literary & linguistic computing >Marlowe and overreaching: A misuse of stylometry
【24h】

Marlowe and overreaching: A misuse of stylometry

机译:马洛(Marlowe)和超越:超越了测距法

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

In 'Christopher Marlowe: Hype and Hoax'(2018), Hartmut Ilsemann implies that his application of the Rolling Delta feature of R Stylo is sufficiently robust that a century and a half of traditional scholarship should be overturned, and Marlowe stripped of the majority of his canon, including Doctor Faustus and Edward II. The article concludes that 'Marlowe is totally overrated in his influence on modern English drama' (p. 26), the natural consequence of stripping away 5/7ths of his canon. In this response, I demonstrate that the assumptions underlying this application of the Delta method, and the application itself, are fundamentally flawed, leading to predictably erroneous conclusions. Problems with the study include a poorly designed test environment, incorrect preparation of texts, assuming that 'Marlowe's style' can be determined by a single early play, selecting and constructing Shakespeare's comparison texts in a manner likely to prejudice results, ignoring the effect upon style of a play's date and genre, failing to consider the effect of different-length comparison texts, and dismissing external evidence of authorship that conflicts with the test outcomes. I argue that in the light of these issues, the results and conclusions must be dismissed. Further, the question is raised as to whether the current methods of computational stylistics, even when more rigorously applied, are equipped to challenge the attribution of the accepted Marlowe canon.(1)
机译:在《克里斯托弗·马洛(Christopher Marlowe:Hype and Hoax)》(2018年)中,哈特穆特·伊尔塞曼(Hartmut Ilsemann)暗示他对R斯蒂洛(R Stylo)的滚动三角洲功能的应用足够强大,应推翻一个半世纪的传统奖学金,马洛(Marlowe)剥夺了大部分他的经典著作包括Faustus医生和Edward II。文章的结论是,“马洛(Marlowe)对现代英语戏剧的影响被完全高估了”(第26页),这是剥夺他的经典著作的5/7的自然结果。在此回应中,我证明了Delta方法的这种应用以及该应用本身所基于的假设从根本上是有缺陷的,从而得出了可预测的错误结论。这项研究的问题包括设计不良的测试环境,不正确的文本准备,假设“马洛风格”可以由一个单一的早期戏剧来确定,选择和构建莎士比亚的比较文本,其方式可能会影响结果,而忽略了对风格的影响戏剧的日期和类型,没有考虑不同长度的比较文本的影响,并且忽略了与测试结果相矛盾的作者身份的外部证据。我认为,鉴于这些问题,必须摒弃其结果和结论。此外,人们提出了一个问题,即即使更严格地应用了当前的计算文体方法,也是否足以挑战公认的Marlowe教规的归属。(1)

著录项

  • 来源
    《Literary & linguistic computing》 |2019年第1期|1-12|共12页
  • 作者

    Barber Ros;

  • 作者单位

    Goldsmiths Univ London, Dept English & Comparat Literature, London, England;

  • 收录信息
  • 原文格式 PDF
  • 正文语种 eng
  • 中图分类
  • 关键词

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号