hrm...
-
-
Replying to @generativist
Sorry for The Boring. I just get irrationally enthusiastic about stylometric analysis.


1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @untravel
Nope i like it
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @generativist
For (this part of) my doctoral research, I worked with an econmetrician that I knew. I collected the data, applied my 'baby math' analysis & asked him: is this right? A few regressions later, he told me: 'it is right, by this much....' My defense committee was unimpressed.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @untravel @generativist
They didn't understand the math, so naturally assumed it wasn't important.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @untravel @generativist
I wanted to continue with stylometric analysis, but getting access to searchable, electronic versions of the necessary texts required funding I didn't have.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @untravel
Yea.its another cool thing about emerging open access solutions
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @generativist
Yes, definitely. I
open access. But the problem (for me) is that critical editions are (usually) still under copyright. It's one thing to have open access to contemporary research. Open access to source texts is 'a whole nother thang'...1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @untravel @generativist
To translate: the collected works are an affordable but inferior data set. The complete works (aka a critical edition) are the ideal data set for the hypotheses i want to test, but not publicly available electronically. Grrr.
2 replies 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @untravel @generativist
During my defense, my statistical conclusions were rejected (by one jury member) on this basis: Yeah, sure, you *proved* it. But only for the inferior data set, not the ideal one.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.