21–30 of 178 posts
The author failed to mention the context of the data chosen; specifically the dates. For example, rob vs. steal, would change depending on the century the work was created.
Eh?
Both come so naturally to me that I honestly have no idea which centuries you're talking about, or which you think is obsolete.
The reference at the end talking about comparing changes over time reminded me of a problem I've been kicking around. For this particular system that's not too hard, since you're putting each word on a one-dimensional femininity/masculinity scale, so you could plot a word on a line graph or something. But what do you do if you want to evaluate the changes of more complex relationships over time? Not just mapping word…
what do you do if you want to evaluate the changes of more complex relationships over time?
Which complex relationships are you talking about here?
Edit: I think I understand what you're asking. Maybe one good way of doing this would be to cluster word groups for different periods of time. You could then perhaps look at where a word is now, where it was at the beginning of "time" and take the delta to examine words whose meaning has changed the most.
Another approach might be to do apriori over time. Take a text from 1600 and lhs is "some manly action" and rhs is "he". Take a text from 2000 and lhs is "some formerly manly action" and rhs is still "he" but with much lower levels of support.
The author failed to mention the context of the data chosen; specifically the dates. For example, rob vs. steal, would change depending on the century the work was created.
The author mentions in the second paragraph that the data comes from scraping Wikipedia articles' plot descriptions. So the plots might be old, but the descriptions (and language) were all written recently.
It's interesting how thoroughly ingrained sexist concepts are in the language. Even a verb that's fairly active like 'resist' assumes a power relation in which they are in a worse position. I'd like to see this done by country or year or language or genre.
Well, we're talking about gender here, not sex, and given that there are two genders [commonly represented in literature], it stands to reason that they would have different tendencies of behavior, or else there would be no difference between the genders, and the concept would not exist.
HN : Social Issues :: general conversation : a vegan
It's interesting how thoroughly ingrained sexist concepts are in the language. Even a verb that's fairly active like 'resist' assumes a power relation in which they are in a worse position. I'd like to see this done by country or year or language or genre.
Is it sexist if it's reflective of reality? Men commit more aggressive crimes than women by far.
It's interesting how thoroughly ingrained sexist concepts are in the language. Even a verb that's fairly active like 'resist' assumes a power relation in which they are in a worse position. I'd like to see this done by country or year or language or genre.
Heh. You have no idea. English doesn't even have proper genders. You're on easy mode. If I say: "Your manager is good.", it's neutral. You can't figure out if I'm talking about a man or a woman without something additional. In Romanian, and I guess in most Latin languages, no such luck. Except for a handful of neologisms, everything clearly mentions the gender, for better of for worse. The direct translation in Roman…
It might've been better had the author (and the Jane Austen article's author) used some NLP processing to see whether the pronoun was actually the subject of those verbs. But I'll grant that it's usually the case.
Also interesting: gender and the object of those verbs.
EDIT: after some research (that I should've done before posting), it's a remarkably effective technique and it seems only the most contorted sentences might get tripped up. English is nearly always Subject-Verb-Object.