File /Humanist.vol22.txt, message 102


Date: Thu, 03 Jul 2008 08:39:17 +0100
From: "Humanist Discussion Group \(by way of Willard McCarty              <willard.mccarty-AT-mccarty.org.uk>\)" <willard-AT-LISTS.VILLAGE.VIRGINIA.EDU>
Subject: 22.100 falsification of process & its publication
To: <humanist-AT-Princeton.EDU>


               Humanist Discussion Group, Vol. 22, No. 100.
       Centre for Computing in the Humanities, King's College London
  www.kcl.ac.uk/schools/humanities/cch/research/publications/humanist.html
                        www.princeton.edu/humanist/
                     Submit to: humanist-AT-princeton.edu



         Date: Thu, 03 Jul 2008 08:32:53 +0100
         From: Geoffrey Rockwell <georock-AT-mcmaster.ca>
         Subject: Re: 22.098 falsification of process & its publication

Dear Willard,

You asked an interesting question about process and computing,

>My question here is, has anyone else thought of these matters, esp
>about how involvement with computing is changing how we write?

Stéfan Sinclair and I have been thinking about 
the integration of text analysis tools into the 
research process and trying to imagine tools that 
would travel with you as your research matures. 
This has led us down a path that John Bradley has 
been exploring - looking at how humanists do 
research from when a project is conceived to when 
it is written up. There seems to be little 
written about how we do research and what tools 
we use at different points, though two references are at hand:

W. S. Brockman, L. Neumann, C. L. Palmer and T. 
J. Tidline. <i>Scholarly Work in the Humanities 
and the Evolving Information Environment</i> 
Digital Library Federation and Council on Library 
and Information Resources, 2001. 
[[<http://www.clir.org/pubs/reports/pub104/contents.html]]>http://www.clir.org/pubs/reports/pub104/contents.html]]

J. Bradley. <i>Thinking Differently About 
Thinking: Pliny and Scholarship in the 
Humanities</i> <i>Digital Humanities 2007</i>. 
University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign: 2007. 
[[<http://www.digitalhumanities.org/dh2007/abstracts/xhtml.xq?id=124]]>http://www.digitalhumanities.org/dh2007/abstracts/xhtml.xq?id=124]] 


The approach Stéfan and I have taken is to pair 
up and try to do rapid research experiments. By 
pairing up one of us can do "the research" while 
one can document what we are doing. Pairing up 
has also forced us to talk through what we do. 
One conclusion we have come to is that most 
tools, as useful as they might be at one stage in 
the research cycle, don't travel well - it is 
hard to get results out of a text analysis tool 
and into an electronic paper the way you can get 
bibliographic references out of EndNote (or 
Zotero) and into your MS Word document. I wonder 
if we might be less inclined to tell the story of 
the research if we could easily exhibit right in 
an electronic issue of the research essay.

For those interested you can see a short essay 
that tries to exhibit the tools used, "Now, 
Analyze That" at 
<http://tada.mcmaster.ca/Main/NowAnalyzeThat>http://tada.mcmaster.ca/Main/NowAnalyzeThat

The documentation for that experiment and related 
reflections are at, 
<http://tada.mcmaster.ca/Main/ExperimentsInTextAnalysis>http<http://tada.mcmaster.ca/Main/ExperimentsInTextAnalysis>://tada.mcmaster.ca/Main/ExperimentsInTextAnalysis 


Yours,

Geoffrey Rockwell

   

Humanist Main Page

 

Display software: ArchTracker © Malgosia Askanas, 2000-2005