Correlation of Static and Dynamic Components in S. T. Coleridge’s Poetical Texts
Zinovyeva Irina Viktorovna
Saratov State Law Academy (Branch) in Smolensk
Submitted: 22.07.2021
Abstract. The paper aims to reveal the correlation of static and dynamic components in S. T. Coleridge’s poetical works published a long time after they were written. The study is based on stylometric analysis; the research methodology includes statistical methods, such as Busemann coefficient and chi-squared test. Scientific novelty of the work lies in the fact that relying on the analysis of S. T. Coleridge’s creative heritage (two well-known poems served as a research material), the researcher for the first time proposes a model of interaction of static and dynamic components in his artistic narrative. The following conclusions are justified: in the opening stanza the ratio of static and dynamic components is almost equal, in the final stanza dynamic component tends to prevail, the level of dynamism varies substantially within the line.
Key words and phrases: С. Т. Кольридж, коэффициент Бузмана, статика и динамика описания, номинальность, S. T. Coleridge, Busemann coefficient, static and dynamic description, nominality
Open the whole article in PDF format. Free PDF-files viewer can be downloaded .
References:
Andreev V. S. Kvantitativnyi analiz stilya: raspredelenie chastotnosti morfologicheskikh klassov slov v tekstakh G. Longfello // Izvestiya Smolenskogo gosudarstvennogo universiteta. 2019. № 4 (48). S. 166-174.
Andreev S. N. Vzaimodeistvie razlichnykh vidov opisaniya v poemakh A. S. Pushkina // Izvestiya Smolenskogo gosudarstvennogo universiteta. 2017. № 2 (38). S. 6-13.
Gasparov M. L. Tochnye metody analiza grammatiki v stikhe // Slavyanskoe yazykoznanie: XII Mezhdunarodnyi s"ezd slavistov (g. Krakov, 1998 g.). M.: Nauka, 1998. S. 169-181.
Krasnoperova M. A. Osnovy rekonstruktivnogo modelirovaniya stikhoslozheniya: na materiale ritmiki russkogo stikha. SPb.: Izd-vo S.-Peterb. un-ta, 2000. 238 s.
Martynenko G. Ya. Vvedenie v teoriyu chislovoi garmonii teksta. SPb.: Izd-vo S.-Peterb. un-ta, 2009. 251 s.
Altmann G., Andreev S., M?steck? M. Piotrowski Law in Sequences of Activity and Attributiveness: A Four-Language Survey // Glottometrics. 2018. Vol. 42. P. 21-38.
Altmann G., Andreev S., M?steck? M. Sonnets: Quantitative Inquiries. L?denscheid: RAM-Verlag, 2018. Studies in Quantitative Linguistics 29. 128 p.
Altmann G., Andreev S., Popescu I.-I. Skinner’s Hypothesis Applied to Russian Adnominals // Glottometrics. 2017. Vol. 36. P. 32-69.
Altmann G., Naumann S., Popescu I.-I. Aspects of nominal style // Glottometrics. 2016. Vol. 23. P. 23-55.
Andreev S., M?steck? M. Activity in Czech and Russian Nineteenth-Century Sonnets: A Contrastive Study // Glottotheory. International Journal of Theoretical Linguistics. 2018. Vol. 9. Iss. 1. P. 89-104.
Cortelazzo M. A., Nadalutti P., Ondelli S., Tyuzzi A. Authorship Attribution and Text Clustering in Contemporary Italian Novels // Structure, Function and Process in Texts. L?denscheid: RAM-Verlag, 2018. P. 1-14.
Gladwin A. A. G., Lavin M. J., Look D. M. Stylometry and Collaborative Authorship: Eddy, Lovecraft, and ‘The Loved Dead’ // Digital Scholarship in the Humanities. 2017. Vol. 32. № 1. P. 123-140.
Gnatchuk H. The Classification of English Styles on the Basis of Lexical Parameters: A Case of Clustering Analysis // Glottometrics. 2019. Vol. 45. P. 57-62.
Gnatchuk H., Gnatciuc A. Identification of English Styles on the Basis of Parts of Speech: A Case of Principal Component Analysis and Factor Analysis // Glottometrics. 2020. Vol. 48. P. 52-66.
Juola P. Authorship Attribution // Foundations and Trends in Information Retrieval. 2006. Vol. 1. Iss. 3. P. 233-334.
Pawlowski A., Topolski K., Malak P., Kocon J., Marcinczuk M. Statistical Distributions of Parts of Speech Frequencies in Polish: Big Data Analysis // Structure, Function and Process in Texts. L?denscheid: RAM-Verlag. 2018. P. 34-54.
Rudman J. The Non-Traditional Case for the Authorship of the Twelve Disputed Federalist Papers: A Monument Built on Sand // Proceedings of ACH/ALLC 2005, Association for Computing and the Humanities. Victoria, 2005. P. 97-122.
Rybicki J. Does size matter? A re-examination of a time-proven method // Digital Humanities 2008: Conference Abstracts. Oulu: University of Oulu, 2008. P. 184.
Van Peer W., Hakemulder J., Zynger S. Muses and Measures: Empirical Research Methods for the Humanities. Newcastle: Cambridge Scholars Publishing, 2007. 366 p.
Русский
