Mon Nov 11 13:41:28 1996

From owner-tc-list  Mon Nov 11 13:41:28 1996
Return-Path: 
Received: by scholar.cc.emory.edu (SMI-8.6/SMI-SVR4)
	id NAA09206; Mon, 11 Nov 1996 13:39:06 -0500
X-Sender: waltzmn@popmail.skypoint.com
Message-Id: 
In-Reply-To: <1.5.4.32.19961111181022.006bd26c@mail.teleport.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Date: Mon, 11 Nov 1996 13:35:30 -0700
To: tc-list@scholar.cc.emory.edu
From: "Robert B. Waltz" 
Subject: Re: Patristic statistics
Sender: owner-tc-list@scholar.cc.emory.edu
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: tc-list@scholar.cc.emory.edu
content-length: 2996

On Mon, 11 Nov 1996, "Dale M. Wheeler"  wrote, in part:

>I'm finally back at my office where the article is with my
>notes...here are some follow-up thoughts...
>
>Here's an example of what caught my interest in the Aland
>article (for those who haven't read or don't have it; for
>those who do, p. 139); he lists the various Fathers with
>their citation statistics:
>
>"2. Irenaeus (181) passages: 67% against the Majority text
>(24% of which show agreement with the "Egyptian text"),
>16.5% common to both texts, and 16.5% with the Majority
>text."
>
>Now if we assume that our base is 100%, then I think this
>is what we end up with (check the math, my doctorate is
>in Greek/NT :-)  ):
>
>Agrees with Maj only -        16.5%
>Agrees with Maj & Alex -      16.5%
>                             ------
>Total Agree with Maj          33.0%
>
>
>Agrees with Alex only -       24.0%
>Agrees with Alex & Bzy -      16.5%
>                             ------
>Total Agree with Alex         40.5%
>
>
>Agrees with Alex only -       24.0%
>Agrees with Byz only -        16.5%
>Agrees with both -            16.5%
>                             ------
>Total Agree with Known Texts  57.0%
>Remainder with No Text        43.0%

Or, to put it another way,

Total readings:                     181
Agree with the Egyptian text only:   43
Agree with the Byzantine text only:  30
Agree with Egyptian and Byzantine:   30
Agree with neither:                  78

Slicing another way --
Byzantine readings:                  60
Egyptian readings:                   73
Readings that do not go with either: 78

>
>Thus the actual Byz vs Alex comparison is Alex - 24.0%
>and Bzy - 16.5%, a statistical difference of 7.5% (or
>6.5% if you take the total agreements with both texts);
>which MAY be significant, but my impression was that
>there are two factors which serious obviate that
>significance: (1) 43.0% of Irenaeus' text doesn't agree
>with any known text, and (2) Irenaeus was a Western
>Father.
>
>Also--and I say this in the most kind manner possible--
>the figure of "67% against the Maj text" (that's 24%
>Alex alone + 43% doesn't agree with anything) doesn't
>seem to be a fair representation of the data, since
>one could on the same basis say "58.5% against the
>Alex text" (with no corresponding statment about the
>Byz, thus making the actual situation look worse than
>it is).

Speaking as a mathematician, I would say that the 8% difference
in agreements with the two text-types is meaningless given
the small size of the sample (181 readings) and the method
it was selected (readings in GNT) -- as well as the very
fuzzy definitions of the text-types (mentioned below).

[ rest omitted as I think the point has been gotten across: Aland's
results may be interesting, but they are not firm enough to prove
anything.... I think I'm going to have to write an article for the
ENTTC on determining when data is statistically meaningful. Yuck.]

Bob Waltz
waltzmn@skypoint.com

Back