Tue Apr 30 22:28:24 1996

From majordom  Tue Apr 30 22:28:24 1996
Return-Path: 
Received: by scholar.cc.emory.edu (5.0/SMI-SVR4)
	id AA14293; Tue, 30 Apr 1996 22:28:24 +0500
Date: Tue, 30 Apr 1996 22:25:17 -0400 (EDT)
From: Maurice Robinson 
To: tc-list@scholar.cc.emory.edu
Subject: Re: Sampling and Vulgate
In-Reply-To: <9604302346.AA29092@Np.nosc.mil>
Message-Id: 
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Length: 1457
Sender: owner-tc-list@scholar.cc.emory.edu
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: tc-list@scholar.cc.emory.edu



On Tue, 30 Apr 1996, Vincent Broman wrote:

> What you need is a sampling method
> that you can convince your readers is totally independent of
> what you're trying to measure.
> And you would have a hard time convincing me that the selection
> of variants in the UBS3 apparatus is =independent= of the attestation
> by texttypes.

Since the grouping of MSS into near-neighbor clusters will occur within
any sufficiently large sampling base, there is no reason not to select
initially those readings which are more likely to provide texttype-
specific data rather than clutter one's database with numerous readings
which are not texttype-specific.  Virtually the same results will be
obtained by either method, but they will differ only in magnitude of the
results.  I for one would prefer to determine texttype relationships by
who percentage points rather than by the hundredths of percentage points. 

The UBS apparatus is not exactly biassed toward texttype 
interrelationships. The data taken from that apparatus still point to a 
high degree of "mixture" in all non-Byzantine witnesses, and a mixture 
which does not occur in any predictable pattern.

_________________________________________________________________________
Maurice A. Robinson, Ph.D.           Assoc. Prof./Greek and New Testament
Southeastern Baptist Theological Seminary     Wake Forest, North Carolina
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Back