Skip Navigation

Literary and Linguistic Computing 1999 14(1):103-113; doi:10.1093/llc/14.1.103
© 1999 by Association for Literary & Linguistic Computing
This Article
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Craig, H
Right arrow Search for Related Content
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

Authorial attribution and computational stylistics: if you can tell authors apart, have you learned anything about them?

H Craig

Department of English, The University of Newcastle, Callaghan, NSW 2308, Australia. E-mail: eldhc@cc.newcastle.edu.au

Within stylometrics, the disciplines of authorial attribution and descriptive stylistics hitherto have been pursued separately. The first has achieved mainstream status within literary studies, while the second is little recognized. A study of the plays of Thomas Middleton compared with a large control sample shows that it is possible to achieve a good classification of his work in 2,000 word segments as against those of his contemporaries, using frequencies of very common words. Such a result can serve as the basis both for testing Middleton's hand in some disputed plays and for a description of his style. Most of The Revenger's Tragedy, part of The Yorkshire Tragedy, and all of The Second Maiden's Tragedy prove to be in a style similar to that of Middleton's uncontested plays. This style, judging by an examination of instances in context of the ten word types most strongly correlated with the Middleton-other discriminant function, is (among other things) rich in deictics and poor in conjunctions, features readily accommodated to previous descriptions including Middleton's own. It is concluded that classification and description can be mutually supportive: the first confirms the validity of the second, while the second helps to establish the stylistic mechanisms underlying a successful classification.


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 Lit Linguist ComputingHome page
B. Yu
An evaluation of text classification methods for literary study
Lit Linguist Computing, September 1, 2008; 23(3): 327 - 343.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Language and LiteratureHome page
G. Twose
What's in a clause?: Milton's participial style revisited
Language and Literature, February 1, 2008; 17(1): 77 - 96.
[Abstract] [PDF]

Home page
 Lit Linguist ComputingHome page
A. M. Garcia and J. C. Martin
Function Words in Authorship Attribution Studies
Lit Linguist Computing, April 1, 2007; 22(1): 49 - 66.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Disclaimer: Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.