A. Zadok, M. Zhitomirsky-Geffet, Jonathan Schler, Binyamin Katzoff
{"title":"Comparative network analysis as a new approach to the editorship profiling task: A case study of the Mishnah and Tosefta from Rabbinic literature","authors":"A. Zadok, M. Zhitomirsky-Geffet, Jonathan Schler, Binyamin Katzoff","doi":"10.1093/llc/fqad038","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\n Social network analysis of characters in historical works is a popular research methodology in the study of historical literature. This article proposes using this methodology to characterize and comparatively analyze editing styles of similar historical literary works to determine whether they were edited by the same hand. To that end, the study proposes constructing a network of characters for each of the works being studied and to compute standard statistical measures for these networks, thus producing a network-based profile for the editing style of each work, which can be compared to the profiles of various other works. To determine the effectiveness of this new approach, it was tested on two similar works from the realm of Rabbinic literature—the Mishnah and the Tosefta. Our findings show that despite the abundant structural, thematic, and linguistic similarities of the works, their network-based profiles demonstrated clear differences between them with respect to various parameters, like the degree of connectivity, density, and centrality of the networks and their communities, and also with respect to the usage of different types of relationships in each network. These differences are reflected in the network features of the works, rather than in their texts, and so it would be difficult to identify them using direct stylometric analysis on the texts of the works, especially given the stylistic and thematic similarity between them. The approach presented in this article forms a basis for developing automatic classifiers to identify different editors and editing styles based on works’ network-based profiles.","PeriodicalId":45315,"journal":{"name":"Digital Scholarship in the Humanities","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.7000,"publicationDate":"2023-06-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Digital Scholarship in the Humanities","FirstCategoryId":"98","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/llc/fqad038","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"HUMANITIES, MULTIDISCIPLINARY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Social network analysis of characters in historical works is a popular research methodology in the study of historical literature. This article proposes using this methodology to characterize and comparatively analyze editing styles of similar historical literary works to determine whether they were edited by the same hand. To that end, the study proposes constructing a network of characters for each of the works being studied and to compute standard statistical measures for these networks, thus producing a network-based profile for the editing style of each work, which can be compared to the profiles of various other works. To determine the effectiveness of this new approach, it was tested on two similar works from the realm of Rabbinic literature—the Mishnah and the Tosefta. Our findings show that despite the abundant structural, thematic, and linguistic similarities of the works, their network-based profiles demonstrated clear differences between them with respect to various parameters, like the degree of connectivity, density, and centrality of the networks and their communities, and also with respect to the usage of different types of relationships in each network. These differences are reflected in the network features of the works, rather than in their texts, and so it would be difficult to identify them using direct stylometric analysis on the texts of the works, especially given the stylistic and thematic similarity between them. The approach presented in this article forms a basis for developing automatic classifiers to identify different editors and editing styles based on works’ network-based profiles.
期刊介绍:
DSH or Digital Scholarship in the Humanities is an international, peer reviewed journal which publishes original contributions on all aspects of digital scholarship in the Humanities including, but not limited to, the field of what is currently called the Digital Humanities. Long and short papers report on theoretical, methodological, experimental, and applied research and include results of research projects, descriptions and evaluations of tools, techniques, and methodologies, and reports on work in progress. DSH also publishes reviews of books and resources. Digital Scholarship in the Humanities was previously known as Literary and Linguistic Computing.