[net.religion] wordprints revisited

russ@dadla-a.UUCP (11/13/83)

Since there have been some question as to how reliable wordprints are and
whether they can be faked, let me add the following information.

Wordprints are accepted sufficiently to be allowed as evidence in federal
courts.  Much of the work on this type of technique has been done by A. Q.
Morton and he has published a book "Literary Detection" (New York: Charles
Scribner's Sons, 1979).

One study examined two books by Sir Walter Scott, one written early in his
career, the other just before he died.  Even though Scott had suffered four
strokes during the intervening time period, there were no significant
differences in wordprints either within the two works or between them.
[Morton, p.134-36, 142-43] In all studies about whether an author can
change his wordprint style there is either no significant differences or at
most very few minor differences. [Morton, p. 132-7]

As to the question of whether an author can change or imitate another
style, it has been shown that where an imitation is compared to the
wordprint of the original, "the result resembles its creator more than it
does the model." [Morton, p.191]

Can wordprints survive translation?
In a recent study twelve German novellas, written by twelve distinct
individuals, were all translated by the same American author.  When the
wordprints of the twelve German authors were compared by MANOVA,
differences were readily apparent, with statistical significance of a very
high order.  A sizable body of writing in English by the translator was
also available.  When his wordprint in these writings was compared with the
wordprints of the twelve German authors (translated) the differences were
very highly significant.  As an additional check the translator's own
writings were divided into subgroups.  These subgroups of blocks of words
were compared statistically by use of MANOVA.  No significant differences
were found.

Russell Anderson
Tektronix