snoiri'F.i: Airncij-js axd discission. 



377 



sumption has not yet been proved, but 

 in view of what has been said and even 

 of whal was said twenty years ago, it 

 ran not be said to have been dis- 

 proved. If instead of making deduc- 

 tions from groups of 1,000 to 5,000 

 words, Dr. Moritz had declared his be- 

 lief that even 100,000 was too small a 

 number for a perfectly definite char- 

 acteristic curve the statement would 

 have been well worth consideration; 

 but it is difficult to doubt the evidence 

 of diagrams exhibiting the word curves 

 of several of the principal writers of 

 Shakespeare's time, published in this 

 journal, December, 1901, nearly all of 

 which are based on counts of over 100,- 

 000 words each, and especially the very 

 remarkable agreement, amounting to 

 practical identity of the two curves 

 from Shakespeare, each including 

 about 200,000 words; the almost 

 equally close agreement of two curves 

 of 75,000 words each from Ben Jonson ; 

 and the striking difference between the 

 latter and the curve of Shakespeare, 

 although the ' form of composition ' is 

 the same in both, a fact directly op- 

 posed to Dr. Moritz's conclusion from 



a few groups of 5,000 words each.* 

 After the reader has examined the close 

 agreement of these large groups from 



i the same author, he may consider the 

 contrasted curves of Bacon and Shakes- 

 peare, representing the counts of over 

 a half million words, and, as far as I 

 am concerned, he is still ' at liberty to 

 draw any conclusion he pleases.' 



Dr. Moritz's studies of the influence 

 of ' form of composition ' on the word 

 curve are instructive and it is to be 

 hoped that he will have the patience 

 and courage to continue them. When 

 his word counting, instead of including 

 only a few thousands, shall have 



j reached a million or two, and these of 

 not more than a half dozen authors, 

 what he may have to say upon the 

 subject will be listened to with interest. 

 T. C. Mexdexhall. 

 Florence, Italy, 

 June 24, 1904. 



*It is interesting to compare diagrams 8, 11 

 and 14 of his paper, to note the general agree- 



; ment of the two curves for each author, the 

 general and, indeed, striking differences 

 among the three authors (which would have 

 been much more evident in means of the sev- 

 eral pairs) and to inquire if he has even cor- 



I rectly interpreted his own diagrams? 



