Search

Compared to the epistemic traditions digital palaeography builds on, how is it transformative? In this article I will outline the emergent meanings and possible research directions of digital palaeography by reflecting on the past 15 years of approaches and conceptualizations in the field. By departing from a contextualized take of the term digital coupled with humanities and palaeography, I will show how digital approaches relate to the scholarly tradition of the study of handwriting and writing systems as a whole and how recent approaches of digital palaeography can be defined as critical, self-reflective, multidisciplinary and interdisciplinary. Moving between a formal and a historically situated analysis, I will relate practices of modelling of handwriting in digital palaeography to modelling in digital humanities more generally. Digital palaeography will emerge well positioned to represent the complexity of handwritten objects from the unfamiliar perspective of the substance of the expression of handwriting (text as shape). [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Even though dialectometric approaches have significantly contributed to the development of dialectology in the last few decades, no relevant analyses have ever been performed on Modern Greek dialects. This article attempts to fill this gap by using dialectometric techniques to measure the degrees of association between aggregate morphological, phonological, and syntactic differences in nineteen varieties of inner Asia Minor Greek (i.e. of Cappadocian, Pharasiot, and Silliot). Our methods include correlations (between pairs of linguistic levels and between linguistic levels and geography) as well as multidimensional scaling and cluster analysis (of the whole dataset as well as of the linguistic levels), which allow us, on the one hand, to draw conclusions about the associations of linguistic levels and the distributions of dialects and, on the other hand, to directly compare our results to those coming from previous dialectometric studies and Greek dialectology. Results show that, although the complete dataset, phonology, and morphology yield—in some instances—similar patterns (i.e. high correlations between them as well as with geography, high agreement of dialect classifications), the level of syntax deviates the most, which is interpreted as a tendency to form larger dialect areas. Our findings are consistent with patterns found in earlier large-scale studies in dialectometry, but they only partially confirm the classifications of Greek dialectology. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]