20.428 methods for a novel? Peter Shillingsburg's seminar?

From: Humanist Discussion Group (by way of Willard McCarty willard.mccarty_at_kcl.ac.uk>
Date: Wed, 31 Jan 2007 06:14:16 +0000

               Humanist Discussion Group, Vol. 20, No. 428.
       Centre for Computing in the Humanities, King's College London
                     Submit to: humanist_at_princeton.edu

   [1] From: Willard McCarty <willard.mccarty_at_kcl.ac.uk> (24)
         Subject: methods for investigating a novel?

   [2] From: lachance_at_origin.chass.utoronto.ca (Francois (48)
         Subject: Re: 20.423 Peter Shillingsburg's London Seminar, 8

         Date: Wed, 31 Jan 2007 06:06:52 +0000
         From: Willard McCarty <willard.mccarty_at_kcl.ac.uk>
         Subject: methods for investigating a novel?

Dear Humanist colleagues, I wonder if you could advise me which
methods to use to investigate the authorship of Tihiy Don (The Quiet
Don) by Mihail A. Sholohov? Some time ago there was a heated
discussion on the authorship of Tihiy Don for which Mihail Sholohov
received the Nobel Prize in literature. A. I. Solzhenitsyn, I.N.
Medvedeva-Tomashevskaya, Z. Tomashevskaya, A. Zayats, V, Pravdyuk, R.
Medvedev, A. Fomenko and M. Mezentsev are sure that M. Sholohov stole
the text of Tihiy Don from Fedor Kryukov, who was the Don writer and
died during the Russian Civil war in 1919. A. Fomenko studied the
frequency of occurrence of the functional words and came to the
conclusion that it was not Sholohov who wrote Tihiy Don (The Quiet
Don) but Fedor Kryukov. However, the Norwegian Slavist Kjetso came to
the oposite conclusion, using the statistical methods. Kjetso stated
that it was Sholohov who wrote Tihiy Don. I wonder if there were any
other investigations using math. statistical methods. I studied the
use of the prepositions in the prose of Sholohov, Krykov, Tolstoy,
Dostoevskiy, Goncharov, Turgenev, Bulgakov and some other writers. I
wonder in which journal or magazine I may publish my results. I'd
like to discuss my results with those interested. I am looking
forward to hearing from you to my e-mail address:
yutamb_at_mail.ru Sincerely yours Yuri Tambovtsev, Novosibirsk, Russia

Dr Willard McCarty | Reader in Humanities Computing | Centre for
Computing in the Humanities | King's College London |

         Date: Wed, 31 Jan 2007 06:08:10 +0000
         From: lachance_at_origin.chass.utoronto.ca (Francois Lachance)
         Subject: Re: 20.423 Peter Shillingsburg's London Seminar, 8 February


In advance of the Feb 8 seminar, I have a few questions that arise
from the description which may or may
not be ascribable to Peter Shillingsburg himself (would they be words
of yours?):

> Humanist Discussion Group, Vol. 20, No. 423.
> Date: Mon, 29 Jan 2007 09:27:40 +0000
> From: Willard McCarty <willard.mccarty_at_kcl.ac.uk>
> >
> Professor Shillingsburg's three-part seminar begins by (1) describing
> what might be the nature of literary works and texts (the "thing"
> that might be tranported into the electronic medium from a material
> one), (2) examining what is entailed in representing or
> re-representing a work in ways that might be more or less--preferably
> less--misleading, and (3) embracing the subjectivity of editing and
> exposing the chimera of objectivity in scholarly editing regardless
> of medium. The purpose is to emphasize the complexity of the task
> and suggest a collaborative way to address the idea of electronic
> scholarly editing.

Lovely neologism : tranported does it mean "mapping" or
"transformationally porting" which in topological
terms might be a sort of mapping?

Is the conjunction betwee "work" and "text" meant to be a
coordinationg (as opposed to disjunctive)
conjunction? i.e. is the set of literary works and texts a union of
various semiotic kinds? Or is
the adjective literary modifying both texts and works as distinct
categories? Sorry to worry this
via grammatical niceities but the Kantian ghost captured with the
scarequoted round the "thing" makes me
wonder if there is a misplaced materialsim at play in the
description. Of course these considerations lurk
in and around the question of repetition and representation as well
as whether an objective subjectivity
can emerge form the process of electronic editing whether of
aretfacts digitally approached
(whether electricity is involved is moot).

> I hope to see you there.
Close your eyes and you can imagine many many of us there...
tranported in a collab way.

Francois Lachance, Scholar-at-large
Everyone is a little bit crazy; everyone at some time has a learning
No one is ever a little bit positive.
Received on Wed Jan 31 2007 - 01:36:51 EST

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0 : Wed Jan 31 2007 - 01:36:59 EST