The limits of distinctive words: Re-evaluating literature’s gender marker debate

Simple item page
dc.check.date2019-04-06
dc.check.infoAccess to this article is restricted until 24 months after publication by request of the publisher.en
dc.contributor.authorWeidman, Sean G.
dc.contributor.authorO'Sullivan, James
dc.date.accessioned2017-10-24T09:18:49Z
dc.date.available2017-10-24T09:18:49Z
dc.date.issued2017-04-06
dc.date.updated2017-10-23T14:19:38Z
dc.description.abstractThe ongoing dispute in literary studies concerned with gender and writing style is wide and varied. Our preliminary analyses lend evidence to the claims that such gender differences are evident in writing across periods. While we follow in the methodological footsteps of such studies, particular those completed by Hoover (Textual analysis. In Price, K. M. and Siemens, R. (eds), Literary Studies in the Digital Age. Modern Language Association of America, 2013) and Rybicki (2016), we have shifted the focus of our investigation away from style, in the macro-analytical sense, to period and its relation to gender-differentiable terminology. Doing so recognizes the limitations of approaches like Zeta and Delta, while simultaneously benefiting from their affordances. Accepting that one can never have too large or robust a data set for this type of macro-analytic case study, we attempt to build on the foundations set down by Hoover and Rybicki, analyzing gender markers across a selection of male and female authors, and doing so crucially with a concern for the evolution of gender markers over specified canonical literary periods.en
dc.description.statusPeer revieweden
dc.description.versionAccepted Versionen
dc.format.mimetypeapplication/pdfen
dc.identifier.articleidfqx017
dc.identifier.citationWeidman, S. G. and O’Sullivan, J. (2017) 'The limits of distinctive words: Re-evaluating literature’s gender marker debate', Digital Scholarship in the Humanities, 33(2), pp. 374-390. doi:10.1093/llc/fqx017en
dc.identifier.doi10.1093/llc/fqx017
dc.identifier.endpage390
dc.identifier.issn2055-7671
dc.identifier.issued2
dc.identifier.journaltitleDigital Scholarship In The Humanitiesen
dc.identifier.startpage374
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/10468/4927
dc.identifier.volume33
dc.language.isoenen
dc.publisherOxford University Press (OUP)en
dc.relation.urihttps://academic.oup.com/dsh/article/doi/10.1093/llc/fqx017/3111279/The-limits-of-distinctive-words-Re-evaluating
dc.rights© The Author 2017. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of EADH. This is a pre-copyedited, author-produced version of an article accepted for publication in Digital Scholarship in the Humanities following peer review. The version of record is available online at: https://doi.org/10.1093/llc/fqx017en
dc.subjectDigital Humanitiesen
dc.subjectGender Studiesen
dc.subjectStylometryen
dc.subjectLiteratureen
dc.titleThe limits of distinctive words: Re-evaluating literature’s gender marker debateen
dc.typeArticle (peer-reviewed)en
Files
Original bundle
Now showing 1 - 2 of 2
Thumbnail Image
Name:
Gender_Markers_Article_(Submission_#3).docx
Size:
6.15 MB
Format:
Microsoft Word XML
Description:
Author's original
Thumbnail Image
Name:
Gender_Markers_Article.pdf
Size:
5.3 MB
Format:
Adobe Portable Document Format
Description:
Accepted version
Download
License bundle
Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
Thumbnail Image
Name:
license.txt
Size:
2.71 KB
Format:
Item-specific license agreed upon to submission
Description:
Download
Collections
Digital Arts and Humanities - Journal Articles