[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: VMs: Epibrating Cerebrating
On Thu, 2 Dec 2004, Marke Fincher wrote:
> The word sequences below do not look like the product of
> random, or even arbitrary selection! What do they look
> like? Don't say coincidence...
> chedy.qoteey.oteedy.lkedy.shedy. qokal.
I take it you've been doing fuzzy matches within the VMs. You might look
for similar phenomena in non-VMs text as a control.
However, going with this, it strikes me that it would be especially useful
to try matches of this sort between label text and body text, especially
adjacent body text.
One might also try, essentially, differencing such examples, as much to
see what is irrelevant (on this hypothesis) as what is. My quick
impression is that the differences are not necessarily constant in
character, at least at the EVA level. They might be moreso working with
EVA resolved into its constituent graphs.
For example, a lack of distinction between t and k has been suggested,
e.g., by Stolfi. But e vs. d is a question of "e" (or "c") vs. e + the
d-flourish, while d vs. nil is e + d-flourish vs. nil. In the first case
the flourish is additional, while in the second both the "base" and the
flourish are additional.
To unsubscribe, send mail to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxx with a body saying: