ERDNASE

Discuss general aspects of Genii.
Bob Coyne
Posts: 717
Joined: January 26th, 2008, 12:00 pm
Favorite Magician: Charlies [sic]
Location: New York, NY

Re: ERDNASE

Postby Bob Coyne » December 26th, 2020, 1:03 am

Brad Henderson wrote:Bob - your case fails to convince. Take the copious draughts example - if that word choice had been repeated you would have a convincing case. But it isn’t. Just a paragraph on consuming knowledge which is hardly a unique concept.

In your examples either the most interesting and idiosyncratic word choices fail to be shared - only general concepts which hardly makes the case that they are the same writer - or when word choices are replicated they are hardly unique or idiosyncratic.

To suggest that it is unique for authors of instructional texts to focus on the best ways of doing things is hardly dispositive. If anything - not doing so would be unexpected.

Brad, you state your opinion as though it was fact. The arguments might not convince *you*, but that doesn't mean they fail to be convincing. I have had feedback from many people who have read them and find them very compelling. And of course, they're built on top of all the other evidence for Sanders.

Furthermore, I didn't suggest that any particular parallel example is dispositive on its own. That's a straw man argument. The "copious draughts" example is one of about 250 examples. The aggregate is what is important, and even that can't constitute absolute proof. Though I think it adds greatly to the case for Sanders, which was already very strong.

A few points on your specific objections to the "copious draughts" example.
- Both passages *do* use the same two central words "Wisdom" and "Knowledge". So your statement that word choice wasn't repeated isn't true.
- It's not just word choice (as I've tried to make clear) but modes of thought and attitudes as manifested in the writer's overall voice. I give many examples, some are very specifically about word choice, others about biographical overlap, others about shared metaphors, others on lexical-syntactic constructions, and so on.
- In this case, both passages invoke very similar visual/concrete metaphors. They describe 1) a very PERSONAL account, in 2) a similar HYPERBOLIC style, of 3) how they soaked in "WISDOM/KNOWLEDGE" in 4) LARGE QUANTITIES (copious, heap, vast) in 5) their EARLY FORMATIVE YEARS. So it's all these factors, which is a much more specific parallel than both saying that they consumed knowledge as you characterized it.

Brad Henderson
Posts: 4546
Joined: January 17th, 2008, 12:00 pm
Location: austin, tx

Re: ERDNASE

Postby Brad Henderson » December 26th, 2020, 2:07 am

And YOU are stating your opinion as fact.

It is a fact that Neither use of the word wisdom nor knowledge is interesting at all as neither word is unique or used in an idiosyncratic manner.

I’m sure there are many authors who have used both words before.

And Leonard offers examples where more unusual words are highlighted but are used by the authors in different ways. And why use coup and coup de mains? If both had used the latter you might have a case. Not so with the reality of word choices in the text.

Interwoven - longitudinal : again, not unique words.

I like sanders as a candidate, but this seems to be entirely cases of motivated reasoning.

Leonard Hevia
Posts: 1951
Joined: January 17th, 2008, 12:00 pm
Favorite Magician: Dai Vernon, Frank Garcia, Slydini, Houdini,
Location: Gaithersburg, Md.

Re: ERDNASE

Postby Leonard Hevia » December 26th, 2020, 4:30 am

Brad--when you pointed out that the use of identical interesting and idiosyncratic words by both authors would be more convincing evidence of the same authorship, you neglected to mention that both identical words had to have the same meaning. Out of left field you now raised the bar and added another parameter. It isn't enough that both authors use the same unusual word, the words must also have the same meaning. Why is this?

Isn't the fact that both authors used the word "coups" for example--compelling? In any case both usages of the word have the same meaning. Note also that both authors use the words "dalliance" and "coincident" in exactly the same way.

The words "interwoven" and "longitudinal" may not be unique, but they certainly are interesting. Admittedly "interesting" is subjective but you did list that as a parameter for compelling use of identical words. Both authors shared uncommon words, no motivated reasoning is needed here. It's either the same man or yet another interesting coincidence--among many.

Bob Coyne
Posts: 717
Joined: January 26th, 2008, 12:00 pm
Favorite Magician: Charlies [sic]
Location: New York, NY

Re: ERDNASE

Postby Bob Coyne » December 26th, 2020, 8:09 am

Brad Henderson wrote:And YOU are stating your opinion as fact.

It is a fact that Neither use of the word wisdom nor knowledge is interesting at all as neither word is unique or used in an idiosyncratic manner.

I’m sure there are many authors who have used both words before.

You seemed to have missed the point on that WISDOM example. It's significance is not that wisdom/knowledge are rare words. Instead it is a case of using those same words in the context of very similar visual metaphors (imbibing copious amounts of wisdom vs picking up vast heaps of wisdom in chunks), with the same type of humorous/hyperbolic style in the context of giving a very personal account where they look back at their formative early years.

And as I've said, there are 250 examples that highlight various types of overlap. In some cases, it's biographically relevant allusions where Sanders uses gambling terms lilke "faro" and "poker" or Erdnase referring to archaeological/anthropological preservation and prospecting for gold (both central to Sanders' professions). In other cases, it's a thematic overlap (e.g. a concern for excellence and rigor or motivation/instructions on how to read their text) in conjunction with almost identical phrasing and word choice. In other cases, it's unusual words, as Leo gives some more of those examples. And there are many others. You, personally, may not be atuned to metaphorical and stylistic similarities. So perhaps the more direct and literal syntactic/lexical overlaps are more convincing to you. Have you read the full document? And as I said, it's the aggregate. No single example is dispositive.

Brad Henderson
Posts: 4546
Joined: January 17th, 2008, 12:00 pm
Location: austin, tx

Re: ERDNASE

Postby Brad Henderson » December 26th, 2020, 1:01 pm

Leonard

If a word is unusual one would expect it be used used in the same manner - not in different ones. You can’t move a goal post that should be so obvious that one should feel their head smacked against it.

Bob - you make my point. Drinking and picking up are both interesting metaphors and had he used the same in both cases re wisdom you would have a good example.

The mere fact he used a metaphor isn’t enough - combined with two different words for the same thing makes it less so

And i have no doubt a motivated reasoner could find countless examples, as many have done with bible codes and Qanon posts. That doesn’t make any of them convincing.

While it’s convenient for you to accuse me ‘not being attuned you stylistic/metaphorical similarities’ is it not equally possible that you lack discernment and your motivation/ interests encourage you to hear as similar what isnt ?

Bob Coyne
Posts: 717
Joined: January 26th, 2008, 12:00 pm
Favorite Magician: Charlies [sic]
Location: New York, NY

Re: ERDNASE

Postby Bob Coyne » December 26th, 2020, 2:28 pm

Brad Henderson wrote:Bob - you make my point. Drinking and picking up are both interesting metaphors and had he used the same in both cases re wisdom you would have a good example.

The mere fact he used a metaphor isn’t enough - combined with two different words for the same thing makes it less so

No, I think it's actually an excellent example as it stands. You are being far too literal in what you expect from a metaphor. Which is sort of ironic if you think about it.

Here's the mapping: The metaphor in both cases starts by representing knowledge/wisdom as a physical object. And the acquisition of that knowledge is effected by a young naive person who is not yet wise to the ways of the world. That person acquires the wisdom in large gulps/handfuls as part of a maturing process. And they're presented, not just with a trickle or few items, but with a rapid/large influx of knowledge (copious draughts, vast heaps). The only real difference is at the concrete level of the metaphor, the particular means of acquiring the knowledge (drinking vs picking up). But that's the way metaphors work. You can vary aspects of them but keep the structure of the mapping and hence the crux of the feeling and meaning. In addition, the metaphor reveals something about the person who makes it...in this case how they think about their youth and how they characterize the path they took to becoming more worldly and wise.

On the subject of Sanders/Erdnase use of metaphor. The other one I listed has even more common elements in alignment. They use the same metaphor even at the concrete level (EXHUMING) as well as several distinctive/targeted common word choices ("professional" "preserve" "wicked") in addition to the same stylistic device of alliteration on the same word "wicked waste" vs "wiles and wickedness". And they both mock those same self-serving "professionals" with their inflated claims (moss-covered ruses or bogus mining reports) while referring to knowledge being "well/carefully preserved". Plus the mocking tone and obvious disdain for hypocrisy is mirrored and reinforced by other parts of their writings. The same personality shines through. I would say this example, even on it's own, is as as close to dispositive as one could hope to find.

And again, there are many common aspects to their writing (stylistic, thematic, etc). The point of identifying these 250 correspondence is to triangulate, to see from different angles. If you judge from just one direction (e.g. individual word choice), you don't get a convincing a case as when you consider many aspects metaphors, psychology, puns, dialectical speech, syntactic constructions, etc.
Last edited by Bob Coyne on December 26th, 2020, 2:30 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Brad Henderson
Posts: 4546
Joined: January 17th, 2008, 12:00 pm
Location: austin, tx

Re: ERDNASE

Postby Brad Henderson » December 26th, 2020, 2:29 pm

The brushes with which you choose to paint are far too wide.

Bob Coyne
Posts: 717
Joined: January 26th, 2008, 12:00 pm
Favorite Magician: Charlies [sic]
Location: New York, NY

Re: ERDNASE

Postby Bob Coyne » December 26th, 2020, 2:31 pm

Brad Henderson wrote:The brushes with which you choose to paint are far too wide.

Hey, you're getting the hang of metaphor! :-)

MagicbyAlfred
Posts: 2388
Joined: June 7th, 2015, 12:48 pm
Favorite Magician: Bill Malone
Location: Myrtle Beach, SC

Re: ERDNASE

Postby MagicbyAlfred » December 29th, 2020, 10:45 am

I have enjoyed reading Bob Coyne’s article and work-in-progress, entitled: “S.W. Erdnase and W.E. Sanders — Textual Analysis” (http://www.cs.columbia.edu/~coyne/erdna ... guage.html) (until very recently, entitled, “S.W. Erdnase and W.E. Sanders — Linguistic Analysis”) I find the case that Bob makes for S.W. Erdnase being a pseudonym for E. S. Sanders to be a persuasive. In addition to the perfect anagram, there is a plethora of evidence Bob advances in support of his position, as a review of the article will reveal, but my comment here will be limited to linguistic evidence. In other words, evidence emerging from a comparison of the respective word choices in the writings of Sanders and “Erdnase.”

Below, I have set forth below, 42 of the approximately 250 linguistic comparisons (a/k/a examples) that Bob and various others whom he credits have gleaned from the writings of Erdnase and Sanders. I selected this subset of 42 based on some rather strict ground rules I set for myself: (1) I have only cited examples comprised of two or more words; (2) the words must be identical, or in the rare instances where the words are not identical, they vary primarily only in tense or number (e.g. “make good” versus “made good” or “preclude the possibility of” versus “precludes the possibility of”). Or, in some instances, in between the identical words, there is one (and only one) intervening word (e.g. “quite equal” versus “quite of equal” or, “particularly adapted” versus “particularly well adapted”). But in almost all of the examples I cite, the combinations of words are literally word-for-word identical; (3) I have omitted what I deemed to be extremely common word combinations (although, to be even-handed, at least some of the phrases I’ve included are arguably not extremely uncommon); and (4) I have editorialized very sparingly – only discretionarily in a few select instances – as I want the examples largely to speak for themselves, so that others may evaluate for themselves.

My purpose in doing this is to show the basis of my personal opinion that there’s a strong case for Sanders and Erdnase being one and the same. As I noted, my opinion is not exclusively based on the linguistics, but rather, the linguistics in combination with other evidence. But I will not be discussing any evidence other than linguistic here. As can be seen from the 42 comparative examples I’ve sifted out from Bob’s article, there is an uncanny similarity, indeed identicality, in the verbiage and phrasing running through the writings of Sanders and Erdnase – I believe more than can be accounted for by mere coincidence. The 42 examples being cited here were interspersed throughout Bob’s article, in different places, under various sub-headings. My feeling was that if these examples were all grouped together in one place and reviewed consecutively, it would be very striking, and the examples would then have their optimal impact as evidence supporting Sanders as a candidate.

In my opinion, when the linguistic evidence (particularly that which is cited here) is coupled with other evidence cited by Bob Coyne and others, there is reasonable support for Bob’s (at least implicit) position that the case for Sanders is “compelling,” even if not dispositive. I should add that, in citing only a portion of the linguistic examples from the article, in no way do I mean to imply that the remaining examples cited in the article are not relevant or persuasive. Again, as I mentioned, I set out some strict and narrow criteria that I am following, and I have done so in order to shine a bright spotlight on the strength of the case for Sanders. I have omitted volume and page citations, as those can be found in the article.

So, without more, here are the linguistic comparisons/examples I’ve excerpted from the article Judge for yourself:

Erdnase: we shall describe several processes that MAY BE EMPLOYED ADVANTAGEOUSLY UNDER SPECIAL CIRCUMSTANCES.
Sanders: Such shafts are particularly well adapted to firm ground, but they MAY BE EMPLOYED ADVANTAGEOUSLY UNDER ALL CONDITIONS, EXCEPT WHERE ...

Erdnase: he coolly proposes to "MAKE GOOD" by transforming the wrong card
Sanders: Has "MADE GOOD" at the bar, where he shines

Erdnase: A CAREFUL PERUSAL OF THE FOLLOWING
Sanders: A PERUSAL OF THE FOLLOWING

Erdnase: AS IT IS UTTERLY IMPOSSIBLE for me to see at all
Sanders: AS IT IS UTTERLY IMPOSSIBLE to replace the missing papers...

Erdnase: so as to PRECLUDE THE POSSIBILITY OF the schemer being discovered with the goods on him.
Sanders: the slope of the vein (21 degrees) PRECLUDES THE POSSIBILITY OF the tripod support being used...

Erdnase: The thumb movement is IDENTICALLY THE SAME AS IN the true deal [p55]
Sanders: when set the machine is operated in IDENTICALLY THE SAME WAY AS IN sinking or...
(*Note, this is a curious redundancy that “both” writers used)

Erdnase: it is QUITE EQUAL to the hand shuffle as a blind
Sanders: and the sets nearly or QUITE of EQUAL size.
(Note: Again, odd phraseology. Just as one is either pregnant or not, as opposed to “quite pregnant,” things are either equal or they are not. The word “quite” in the above context is superfluous.)

Erdnase: We give the FACTS AND CONDITIONS of our subject as we find them
Sanders: is so exact in its fidelity to the topographical features of the region and to geographical FACTS AND CONDITIONS
(*Note: I’ve frequently seen the words “facts and circumstances” used in combination, but not so as to “facts and conditions”)

Erdnase: can be accomplished to ANY CONSIDERABLE extent
Erdnase: all men who play for ANY CONSIDERABLE stakes are looking for the best
Sanders: is not in itself sufficient to sustain ANY CONSIDERABLE thrust without a tendency ....
Sanders: the discovery had brought together ANY CONSIDERABLE number of persons

Erdnase: if requested to determine from what single artifice THE GREATEST ADVANTAGE is derived we would unhesitatingly decide...
Sanders: the plan above described may be of THE GREATEST ADVANTAGE in blocking-out the ores...

Erdnase: THE MOST PERFECT shift ever devised
Sanders: One side or face, therefore, is selected — THE MOST PERFECT and even one
(Note: This is notable because if something is described as “perfect,” particularly by a competent writer, the word perfect would not be modified by an adverb such as “most” or “least.” Perfect is perfect.)

Erdnase: The latter position is AN EXCELLENT ONE
Sanders: this joint is without doubt AN EXCELLENT ONE

Erdnase: A VARIED EXPERIENCE has impressed us with the belief that all men...
Sanders: From the winter of '88 until the fall of '90 a somewhat VARIED EXPERIENCE as expert in twine manufacture

Erdnase: knowledge was acquired at the usual EXCESSIVE COST to the uninitiated.
Sanders: because it does away with the ponderous and EXCESSIVELY COSTLY ...

Erdnase: we shall describe several processes that MAY BE EMPLOYED ADVANTAGEOUSLY UNDER SPECIAL CIRCUMSTANCES.
Sanders: Such shafts are particularly well adapted to firm ground, but they MAY BE EMPLOYED ADVANTAGEOUSLY UNDER ALL CONDITIONS, EXCEPT WHERE ...

Erdnase: shift that MAY BE EMPLOYED WITH the GREATEST probability of success [p99]
Sanders: and it MAY BE EMPLOYED WITH GREAT benefit

Erdnase: A third way, and the most GENERALLY EMPLOYED, is for
Sanders: now so GENERALLY EMPLOYED among the metal mines

Erdnase: THERE WOULD BE LITTLE ADVANTAGE derived from clever shuffling, WERE the order to be subsequently disturbed in cutting [p39]
Sanders: THERE CAN BE LITTLE ADVANTAGE to the profession at large IF the discussion as to the best shape for a shaft is to be...

Erdnase: The methods described can BE SUCCESSFULLY WORKED with as many as eight or ten cards
Sanders: from the deposits too small to BE SUCCESSFULLY WORKED in a commercial way

Erdnase: To show THE EASE WITH WHICH the cards travel I shall
Sanders: and THE EASE WITH WHICH it may be manipulated

Erdnase: The top palm can be made with the right hand IN MUCH THE SAME MANNER
Erdnase: right hand packet again on top IN MUCH THE SAME MANNER.
Sanders: near the center of the set IN MUCH THE SAME MANNER as are located the end posts or plates.

Erdnase: It can be ACCOMPLISHED IN THE FOLLOWING MANNER:
Sanders: the hole is now charged which is ACCOMPLISHED IN THE FOLLOWING MANNER d,...

Erdnase: This method of blind cutting is PARTICULARLY ADAPTED for working in with the blind riffle
Sanders: Such shafts are PARTICULARLY WELL ADAPTED to firm ground

Erdnase: but he can pick up any card or group of cards in the order BEST SUITED TO his design
Sanders: come together from the six directions in a manner BEST SUITED TO the needs of the occasion.

Erdnase: THE USUAL PRACTICE is to deal from the bottom.
Sanders: THE USUAL PRACTICE in the West being for each
Sanders: THE USUAL PRACTICE being to make the inner faces of the station sets aline [sic] with those of...

Erdnase: bring it down IN THE USUAL WAY of shuffling on
Sanders: are hung IN THE USUAL WAY by lag-screws

Erdnase: card with the thumb IN THE USUAL MANNER
Sanders: to afford secure support to the sets by blocking and wedging IN THE USUAL MANNER.

Erdnase: it leaves the top and bottom cards IN THE SAME RELATIVE POSITION
Sanders: both being placed IN THE SAME RELATIVE POSITION within the joint

Erdnase: it is generally dealt ON THE SQUARE in gambling rooms that are run openly
Sanders: Is not the western game I yearn to see played ON THE SQUARE,

Erdnase: These examples of CULLING, if FAIRLY WELL executed.
Sanders: FAIRLY WELL filled with data CULLED in a measure from geologic reports...

Erdnase: This example MIGHT WELL BE TERMED a fancy cull [p82]
Sanders: from the extraction of ores with what MIGHT BE TERMED open blocks...
Sanders: by what MIGHT BE TERMED an enclosing and protecting shield

Erdnase: His PURPOSE in that respect IS SUFFICIENTLY ANSWERED by keeping the desired cards...
Sanders: the required information ... IS SUFFICIENTLY ANSWERED in and by the workings of adjoining property

Erdnase: it has been my VERY GREAT GOOD FORTUNE to discover...
Sanders: we know the VERY GREAT AND GOOD FORTUNE we had in studying under you
(*Note: I find this to be an extraordinarily unique and idiosyncratic phraseology)

Erdnase: The first shift described is executed with both hands and is A GREAT FAVORITE.
Erdnase: This is A GREAT FAVORITE for terminating certain tricks
Sanders: who had been a fellow-cadet with him at West Point and A GREAT FAVORITE there

Erdnase: Faro cards, USED IN CONNECTION WITH a certain form of "brace" box, are treated in this manner.
Sanders: Waste filling is frequently USED IN CONNECTION WITH and as adjunct to the various systems of timbering

Erdnase: knowing players require NOTHING MORE THAN a bare suspicion of skill to
Sanders: a method of timbering ... is NOTHING MORE THAN the crib of the flat deposits

Erdnase: and the reputation is liable to precede him in MANY ANOTHER.
Sanders: among files containing MANY ANOTHER mining report that is less picturesque, less unique.
Sanders: as sweet and handsome as MANY ANOTHER
(*Note: I don’t believe I have heretofore encountered the expression “many another”)

Erdnase: IT IS WELL TO insist that but one card must be moved at a time.
Sanders: IT IS WELL TO leave the tops undisturbed
Sanders: in this classification IT IS WELL TO assume as of the normal type those rocks that possess...

Erdnase: but we regret the truth of the confession that ONCE UPON A TIME we were, and we marveled greatly and also sorrowed, over a continuous and very protracted run of hard luck
Sanders: ONCE UPON A TIME, as all good fairy tales begin, callow, bashful and hopeful youths met together

Erdnase: The deck SO ARRANGED makes every thirteenth card the same value [p179]
Sanders: shafts are of two kinds, one being SO ARRANGED that the ore cars

Erdnase: IT IS NEEDLESS TO SAY THAT I do not know which cards were selected
Sanders: IT IS NEEDLESS TO SAY THAT exactness in the fitting together...

Erdnase: AND AT THE SAME TIME sliding pack outwards and to the right
Sanders: AND AT THE SAME TIME to furnish an opening between the plates and the foot of the shield

Bill Mullins
Posts: 5911
Joined: January 17th, 2008, 12:00 pm
Location: Huntsville, AL
Contact:

Re: ERDNASE

Postby Bill Mullins » December 29th, 2020, 2:29 pm

If you take 50,000-100,000 words each by any pair of English-language writers, I'm sure you will find similar pairs of coincident phrases. For example. So this is only persuasive if the number of pairs here is significantly higher than whatever the average is. Without comparisons to other random pairs of authors for control, it's hard to say what the discoveries above mean.

Bob Coyne
Posts: 717
Joined: January 26th, 2008, 12:00 pm
Favorite Magician: Charlies [sic]
Location: New York, NY

Re: ERDNASE

Postby Bob Coyne » December 29th, 2020, 3:23 pm

Bill Mullins wrote:If you take 50,000-100,000 words each by any pair of English-language writers, I'm sure you will find similar pairs of coincident phrases. For example. So this is only persuasive if the number of pairs here is significantly higher than whatever the average is. Without comparisons to other random pairs of authors for control, it's hard to say what the discoveries above mean.

Bill, a couple points:

All things being equal, I would agree that you would expect to find more overlapping phrases between Erdnase and Sanders than whatever the average is. However, defining and measuring the average is not usually possible, especially when the topics and genres vary widely. For example, Sanders' humorous writing in his class reunion blurbs and poems sounds quite a bit different than his Mine Timbering texts. And in particular, I've noticed less overlap in unusual words or phrases across groupings versus within each grouping. And sometimes, even within a grouping (e.g. one mining article vs another) you'll sometimes find significant differences. So much depends on the exact topic.

So instead of expecting to decide such things by a simple number (deviation from an "average"), you can use your ear, much as you do to identify a voice of a person you hear (but don't see) as being someone you know or not. Or whether two voices are probably the same person or not. Or whether a piece of music "sounds like" Beethoven. Or if a person you see in a distance is who you think it is based on their stance or gait or some other ill-defined attribute. As human beings we do this all the time, and while our judgements aren't perfect, we can usually get a good sense if different perceived phenomena are likely or possibly from the same source or not. Of course there's error in doing that, and that is one reason for identifying a large number of examples and "triangulating" across different aspects of the textual evidence (of which MagicbyAlfred's list is merely one).

The link to Teddy Roosevelt examples that match some in Erdnase doesn't really support your point, since the corpus of text attributable to Roosevelt is an order of magnitude (or more) larger than Erdnase or Sanders. You'd have to count and normalize by the corpus size. Also, as I pointed out when you first posted it, the TR examples you provided aren't as close matches with Erdnase and lack some of the nuances found in the equivalent examples of Sanders with Erdnase.

MagicbyAlfred
Posts: 2388
Joined: June 7th, 2015, 12:48 pm
Favorite Magician: Bill Malone
Location: Myrtle Beach, SC

Re: ERDNASE

Postby MagicbyAlfred » December 29th, 2020, 3:37 pm

OK, it has been brought to my attention that there are other comparative examples in Bob's article that were not included in my previous post but which fit the criteria I laid out for the compilation. This now brings my compilation to 57 examples. So here are some that I had overlooked:

Erdnase: the writer uses no sophistry AS AN EXCUSE FOR its existence.
Sanders: he explains this integration or accretion of good hoss-sense AS AN EXCUSE FOR his lapse from...

Erdnase: used certain terms FOR THE SAKE OF BREVITY
Sanders: FOR THE SAKE OF BREVITY in description, certain symbols letters or figures

Erdnase: and the third card PROVES TO BE the ace.
Sanders: should either of the walls PROVE TO BE weak

Erdnase: IT WILL BE SEEN THAT the old-fashioned or hand shuffle
Sanders: IT WILL BE SEEN THAT a great deal of timber is used....

Erdnase: IT WILL HAVE BEEN SEEN BY THE FOREGOING THAT the presentation
Sanders: Therefore, FROM THE FOREGOING IT WILL BE SEEN THAT the cost of the square set...

Erdnase: an understanding of the CAUSE AND EFFECT of the various actions.
Sanders: the relation between CAUSE AND EFFECT

Erdnase: He knows little of THE REAL VALUE OF money
Sanders: THE REAL VALUE OF the inclined-bottom bin lies in its facility of discharge

Erdnase: This objection IS entirely OVERCOME BY THE USE OF the break
Sanders: this difficulty IS OVERCOME BY THE USE OF a half right-angled miter

Erdnase: and FOR PRACTICAL PURPOSES stocking more than three should not be attempted
Sanders: would be far too cumbersome FOR PRACTICAL PURPOSES

Erdnase: various METHODS OF LOCATING AND producing selected cards
Sanders: the METHODS OF LOCATING AND aligning the sets are those used for...

Erdnase: He also performs HIS PART with the shears when the lambs come to market
Sanders: That he's played well HIS PART

Erdnase: select the four Jacks FOR THE PURPOSE OF ILLUSTRATING how an original athletic tendency
Sanders: FOR THE PURPOSE OF ILLUSTRATION, assume that...

Erdnase: we sorrowfully admit that our own EARLY KNOWLEDGE was acquired ...
Sanders: From my EARLY KNOWLEDGE of you

Erdnase: The bottom palm may be held while the deal is in progress WITHOUT INCONVENIENCE.
Sanders: leaves sufficient hight [sic] for passage WITHOUT INCONVENIENCE.

Erdnase: That THIS IS GENERALLY TRUE cannot be denied, but it is by no means always so.
Sanders: THIS IS GENERALLY TRUE but has one or two exceptions

And just to address Bill's point, I would ask whether, in order to evaluate the evidence presented and find someone guilty or not guilty in a particular trial, must the jury first analyze comparative studies of evidence and verdicts from other cases? Or, can a jury of laypersons, unschooled in the law, except for a very brief crash course from the judge at the end of the case ("jury instructions") bring their own common sense to bear in deciding whether or not the evidence is sufficient to convict?

Bill Mullins
Posts: 5911
Joined: January 17th, 2008, 12:00 pm
Location: Huntsville, AL
Contact:

Re: ERDNASE

Postby Bill Mullins » December 29th, 2020, 4:41 pm

@Bob -- if what you are saying all that is necessary is to decide that Erdnase and Sanders sound alike, then I guess we don't agree. People are, it turns out, not all that good at identifying each other. "Mistaken Identifications are the Leading Factor In Wrongful Convictions". Think how many times in your own life you've had to say, or someone said to you, "Oh, I'm sorry, I thought you were someone else."

I'm happy to agree that there are some very interesting coincidences in what you and I and others have found when comparing Sanders and Erdnase. I just don't think it's anything other than a curiosity. Like you said, "You'd have to count and normalize by the corpus size" before a list of coincidences means anything.

Also, as I pointed out when you first posted it, the TR examples you provided aren't as close matches with Erdnase and lack some of the nuances found in the equivalent examples of Sanders with Erdnase.


The point of the list I made 9 years ago was not that Erdnase must be TR; it was that it is possible to find extensive points of comparison in a pair of random authors with very little effort and in very little time. I made that list in an hour or two, as I recall. If I were to spend a long time, the list would be better, I'm sure.



@MagicByAlfred
And just to address Bill's point, I would ask whether, in order to evaluate the evidence presented and find someone guilty or not guilty in a particular trial, must the jury first analyze comparative studies of evidence and verdicts from other cases?


We don't ask juries to do that. Each side gets expert witnesses, people who have demonstrated significant expertise in a subject, to do that, and then the juries evaluate their conclusions.

I've probably spent as much time and effort as anyone alive in investigating the major candidates. And once you identify someone as a candidate, if you can find out much about them, you will find things that suggest something in common with Erdnase. Every candidate who has been investigated in any depth reveals "clues" that point to Erdnase. Sanders has a pretty big published record, so of course you will find words and phrases he used in common with Erdnase. But if you find someone else of approximately same time frame with a similar published record, I guarantee you will also find coincident words and phrases for that author.

I didn't have much use for the conclusions that Wasshuber drew from Olsson's analysis, but I think one point made by Olsson is relevant: that writers of ca. 1900 were exposed to the same influential books from the previous 40 years or so. If, today, you were to see two different writers use the phrases "Steal this Book" or "I have a dream" or "trickle-down economics", you wouldn't jump to the conclusion that they were in fact the same person. You'd assume that they both were familiar with Abbie Hoffman, Martin Luther King Jr., and Ronald Reagan. And to decide that since Erdnase and Sanders used similar language, you'd first have to rule out that the coincident phrases weren't a result of both of them being exposed to an earlier influential writer who also used them.

Most academic studies that investigate authorship don't use the unusual phrases that stand out. The use analysis of shorter, common words that don't stand out when reading. If analysis of the writing of Erdnase ever reveals the author, I think it will come from looking at those patterns rather than from the unusual turns of phrase.

Bob Coyne
Posts: 717
Joined: January 26th, 2008, 12:00 pm
Favorite Magician: Charlies [sic]
Location: New York, NY

Re: ERDNASE

Postby Bob Coyne » December 29th, 2020, 5:03 pm

Bill Mullins wrote:@Bob -- if what you are saying all that is necessary is to decide that Erdnase and Sanders sound alike, then I guess we don't agree. People are, it turns out, not all that good at identifying each other. "Mistaken Identifications are the Leading Factor In Wrongful Convictions". Think how many times in your own life you've had to say, or someone said to you, "Oh, I'm sorry, I thought you were someone else."

I'm happy to agree that there are some very interesting coincidences in what you and I and others have found when comparing Sanders and Erdnase. I just don't think it's anything other than a curiosity. Like you said, "You'd have to count and normalize by the corpus size" before a list of coincidences means anything.

Yeah, sometimes you mistake someone for someone else. But that's only notable because of the default situation where you *can* identify people correctly. Or at a minimum you can do so at a MUCH greater level than chance. We couldn't function if our perceptual faculties were largely wrong. So, yes, sounding alike doesn't prove they're the same, but it strengthens the case considerably.

btw, I'm not saying further analysis based on statistically measurable qualities is unwarranted. The more info and angles to interpret the data, the better. For example, one thing I ran across (and I think you might have mentioned too) is that both Erdnase and Sanders use the word "but" as meaning "only", as in "there are but two or three players in a game." In addition to sounding somewhat stilted and archaic, a simple search in Google N-Gram viewer verifies that usage of that construction drops by a factor of 5 or so from 1900 to 2000. A similar construction and falloff in usage is found in phrases like "some little distance" vs the more modern "a little distance." So these phrases are less distinctive than they might naively appear to be, just based on the changes of language as it is used over time. As an avenue of research, I also wonder whether there are any regional dialectical patterns that show up in the writing. Sanders was from the West, and I suspect (especially in those days) there were some identifiable phrases or constructions associated with that region of the country. Maybe some of the above patterns (e.g. "some little distance" etc) varied not just over time but over geography.

MagicbyAlfred
Posts: 2388
Joined: June 7th, 2015, 12:48 pm
Favorite Magician: Bill Malone
Location: Myrtle Beach, SC

Re: ERDNASE

Postby MagicbyAlfred » December 29th, 2020, 5:25 pm

"But if you find someone else of approximately same time frame with a similar published record, I guarantee you will also find coincident words and phrases for that author."

Possibly. But will you find someone of the same time frame with a similar published record, whose name is a perfect anagram for S.W. Erdnase, who has written the same number of identical phrases, or more, and for whom there is other substantial evidence supporting their candidacy?

Bob Coyne
Posts: 717
Joined: January 26th, 2008, 12:00 pm
Favorite Magician: Charlies [sic]
Location: New York, NY

Re: ERDNASE

Postby Bob Coyne » December 29th, 2020, 6:09 pm

Bill Mullins wrote:Most academic studies that investigate authorship don't use the unusual phrases that stand out. The use analysis of shorter, common words that don't stand out when reading. If analysis of the writing of Erdnase ever reveals the author, I think it will come from looking at those patterns rather than from the unusual turns of phrase.

Yes, words and phrases that don't stand out can be significant. And various surface metrics such as sentence length, position of words within sentence, etc. But that's just one way to look at things, and not the traditional approach or necessarily the approach that gives the most insight. When scholars identify sources for Shakespeare's text, for example, they find correspondences of the type I've identified with Sanders and Erdnase. In the example below, the highlighted words all stand out. It's not some hidden quality of normal sounding phrases.

From Thomas North's translation of Plutarch's Lives:
but to take her BARGE in the river of Cydnus, The POOPE whereof was of GOLD, the SAILES OF PURPLE, and the OARES OF SILVER, which kept STROKE in rowing after the sound of musicke of FLUTES,

From Shakespeare's Antony and Cleopatra:
the BARGE she sat in, like a burnish'd throne,
Burn'd on the water: the POOP was beaten GOLD;
PURPLE the SAILS, and so perfumed that
The winds were love-sick with them; the OARS were SILVER,
Which to the tune of FLUTES kept STROKE, and made
The water which they beat to follow faster,

You also find Shakespeare copying himself, sometimes within the same play, again with words and phrases that pop out. A very obvious example is shown below.

Tempest: And DEEPER THAN DID EVER PLUMMET SOUND. I'll drown my book.”
Tempest: I'll seek him DEEPER THAN E'ER PLUMMET SOUNDED. And with him there lie mudded.

There are other phrases in some early Shakespeare plays and some apocryphal plays that raise authorship questions. For example the apocryphal play "The Taming of a Shrew" (vs Shakespeare's canonical "The Taming of THE Shrew") that has the line "Or icy hair that grows on Boreas' chin !" This line stands out because it mirrors ""whose fleece was as white as the haires that grow on father Boreas chinne" by Robert Greene and Thomas Nashe's ""get Boreas by the beard, and the heavenlie bull by the deaw-lap." And thence ensues complex analysis of who wrote what first and who copied whom. And then arguments about who wrote "The Taming of a Shrew" (was it an earlier draft of Shakespeare's, or did he copy from it, etc). The point is that the investigation starts by identifying those common or related words and phrases.

Leonard Hevia
Posts: 1951
Joined: January 17th, 2008, 12:00 pm
Favorite Magician: Dai Vernon, Frank Garcia, Slydini, Houdini,
Location: Gaithersburg, Md.

Re: ERDNASE

Postby Leonard Hevia » December 29th, 2020, 9:00 pm

MagicbyAlfred wrote:Possibly. But will you find someone of the same time frame with a similar published record, whose name is a perfect anagram for S.W. Erdnase, who has written the same number of identical phrases, or more, and for whom there is other substantial evidence supporting their candidacy?


The other substantial and circumstantial evidence:

1. Toyed with anagrams of his name in his notebook as a grade school student.
2. Was near Chicago at the right time: December 1901 and the hotel meeting with Marshall Smith.
3. Purchased six decks of playing cards along with other essentials on a camping trip to the Rockies.
4. Frequented gambling houses.
5. Was familiar with card magic.

Bob Coyne
Posts: 717
Joined: January 26th, 2008, 12:00 pm
Favorite Magician: Charlies [sic]
Location: New York, NY

Re: ERDNASE

Postby Bob Coyne » December 29th, 2020, 9:44 pm

Leonard Hevia wrote:The other substantial and circumstantial evidence:

1. Toyed with anagrams of his name in his notebook as a grade school student.
2. Was near Chicago at the right time: December 1901 and the hotel meeting with Marshall Smith.
3. Purchased six decks of playing cards along with other essentials on a camping trip to the Rockies.
4. Frequented gambling houses.
5. Was familiar with card magic.

Yes, I think are all very strong points in addition to the textual evidence and anagram on his name. Some other points in his favor:

- Sanders knew German, and the word "Erdnase" in German means "earth nose", apropos for a prospector and mining engineer.
- experience with publishing
- probable knowledge of copyright law (via clerking on his father's Senate committee)
- The one person known to be a friend of Erdnase was Del Adelphia, who like Sanders was a Montana resident
- good match physically (size, age, demeanor) with most aspects of Smith's recollections
- possible Dalrymple family connection
- was known to have been working a book in 1900 (mine timbering wasn't published until 1907 and only contained two articles by Sanders)
- had a strong motive for anonymity (his prominent family and father being a Senator)

Bill Mullins
Posts: 5911
Joined: January 17th, 2008, 12:00 pm
Location: Huntsville, AL
Contact:

Re: ERDNASE

Postby Bill Mullins » December 30th, 2020, 7:51 pm

@Bob Coyne -- I don't see how showing that two different people (Shakespeare and Thomas North) used the same language advances the case that Erdnase and Sanders were the same person.

Brad Henderson
Posts: 4546
Joined: January 17th, 2008, 12:00 pm
Location: austin, tx

Re: ERDNASE

Postby Brad Henderson » December 30th, 2020, 8:29 pm

Bob makes my point. In Shakespeare you see him repeating distinctive phraseology EXACTLY. Authors often plagiarize themselves.

You don’t see that in the examples offered re sanders erdnase except in cases of highly common and trivial word pairing for what one could like find hundreds of authors who also employed them.

Having a masters degree in music Ed and having done advanced graduate work in music history I am well aware of the use of the ‘ear’ to determine who wrote a work.

And I can tell you - it is highly unreliable.

Yes. Some composers have extremely distinctive ‘Voices’ but even then it is far too easy to confuse a work written by another as one written by the more well known artist. It’s because we want to classify what we hear as that well known artist. We know his work well. And that encourages use to hear in the lesser known work the definitive elements that we seek.

Bob Coyne
Posts: 717
Joined: January 26th, 2008, 12:00 pm
Favorite Magician: Charlies [sic]
Location: New York, NY

Re: ERDNASE

Postby Bob Coyne » December 30th, 2020, 10:35 pm

Bill Mullins wrote:@Bob Coyne -- I don't see how showing that two different people (Shakespeare and Thomas North) used the same language advances the case that Erdnase and Sanders were the same person.

Bill, That example wasn't intended to show that Erdnase and Sanders were the same person. Instead it was a response to your claim that issues of authorship hinged on words or phrases that don't stand out. While that can be true in some cases, the more typical approach in traditional literary analysis is to identify obviously similar text and make judgements from there. This applies not only to authorship issues but also to interpreting literary allusions, dating of texts, etc.

The Antony and Cleopatra example was one where the copying was very obvious. In other cases, it gets murkier and other arguments come into play. E.g. some of the witches' incantations in Macbeth are posited by some to be written and inserted after-the-fact by John Middleton. I believe this is partially based on the fact that he had written other witches dialog in other plays and partially based on some textual similarities. Different types of arguments come into play depending on the individual cases, but words and phrases that stand out are usually the starting point.

Bob Coyne
Posts: 717
Joined: January 26th, 2008, 12:00 pm
Favorite Magician: Charlies [sic]
Location: New York, NY

Re: ERDNASE

Postby Bob Coyne » December 31st, 2020, 2:26 am

Brad Henderson wrote:Bob makes my point. In Shakespeare you see him repeating distinctive phraseology EXACTLY. Authors often plagiarize themselves.

You don’t see that in the examples offered re sanders erdnase except in cases of highly common and trivial word pairing for what one could like find hundreds of authors who also employed them.

The phrase "MAY BE EMPLOYED ADVANTAGEOUSLY UNDER" is used by both Sanders and Erdnase. It turns up NO hits on Google N-Gram viewer (which looks at all publications from the 1800s to the present day) and a half dozen hits on regular Google search, half of which are for the Erdnase line (or Sanders via my document).

Brad Henderson
Posts: 4546
Joined: January 17th, 2008, 12:00 pm
Location: austin, tx

Re: ERDNASE

Postby Brad Henderson » December 31st, 2020, 11:36 am

Your example is very low on the monkey scale. I don’t think you understand what a unique turn of phrase means.

Bob Coyne
Posts: 717
Joined: January 26th, 2008, 12:00 pm
Favorite Magician: Charlies [sic]
Location: New York, NY

Re: ERDNASE

Postby Bob Coyne » December 31st, 2020, 11:51 am

Bill, though just to be clear, I agree with you that it's not always the unusual words or phrases that stand out that define a writing style or common authorship. A writer's voice involves much more -- how phrases more generally are constructed and strung together, what choices of often regular words are made, how the sentences flow, the themes and topics they focus on, the rhetorical devices they employ, the metaphors they invoke, etc. It's all relevant, and that's why my document tries to identify similarities between Erdnase and Sanders in all those dimensions.

I think it's actually the examples that simultaneously represent several of these different elements that are the most convincing. In particular, the case where a single (and highly characteristic) Erdnase passage (about exhuming moss-covered ruses) is mirrored in a letter by Sanders, where they both use the same metaphor on the same word ("exhume"), use the same alliteration (based on "wicked"), make the same characterization (information that is carefully/well "preserved"), and mock the same group ("professionals").

And not only that, but a second passage by Sanders mirrors the same Erdnase passage in very similar ways, mocking self-constituted "historians" (Sanders) vs self-styled "ex-professionals" (Erdnase). In doing so, the same almost identical hyphenated terms are used, and the respective subjects are encased in scare quotes to mock their self-inflated status. And the information being peddled to an unsuspecting public/citizens is described as being out of date ("antiquated moss-covered" vs "second hand" and "extant information").

In both cases, no single word or phrase within these passages stands out as being highly unusual on its own, but the overall meaning, mocking tone, word choice, and rhetorical style mesh almost identically as they denounce self-promoting professionals (and/or historians) peddling their wares (in card table artifice, mining properties, and historical documentation respectively) to an unsuspecting public.

Bob Coyne
Posts: 717
Joined: January 26th, 2008, 12:00 pm
Favorite Magician: Charlies [sic]
Location: New York, NY

Re: ERDNASE

Postby Bob Coyne » December 31st, 2020, 3:25 pm

Brad Henderson wrote:Your example is very low on the monkey scale. I don’t think you understand what a unique turn of phrase means.

You had claimed that we only find "highly common and trivial word pairing" with Sanders/Erdnase. The phrase I provided is neither a pairing (it's 5 words long) nor highly common (there were less than a handful of occurrences of its use on all of Google and none in Google books/ngrams.

The example I earlier gave with Shakespeare self-copying was in response to Bill's assertion that "Most academic studies that investigate authorship don't use the unusual phrases that stand out. They use analysis of shorter, common words that don't stand out when reading." I'm saying that it can be either. And I provided the Shakespeare examples as cases where the pairings did stand out. It's easy to provide many more literary examples of that sort. My Erdnase/Sanders document tries to look at all the relevant matches, whether they "stand out" or not. Some are unusual words; others express the exact same point using the same phrasing with a combo of matching words and synonyms; others are relevant because of their frequency -- many variations on the same theme; some employ the same wordplay; etc.

It would be great if you just stuck to the discussion and made a good faith attempt to respond to and clarify what is said vs hurling insults (which don't advance your argument). And maybe you'd find some actually agreement if you'd take a less aggressive stance. Or maybe you don't want that :-)

Bill Mullins
Posts: 5911
Joined: January 17th, 2008, 12:00 pm
Location: Huntsville, AL
Contact:

Re: ERDNASE

Postby Bill Mullins » December 31st, 2020, 4:17 pm

Bob -- I don't deny at all that there are some very intriguing similarities of phrase in what Erdnase and Sanders wrote. I've found some of them myself, as a review of this thread will show. I just don't think that the similarities prove (or even suggest) that Erdnase and Sanders are the same guy, for (at least) two reasons:
a. There can be other reasons that two people can write similarly, including common influences (as mentioned above), or a common aesthetic in what makes good writing (I don't know why Ricky Jay wrote the way he did, but I'm sure it resulted from a choice, and other writers might make similar choices that would result in similar prose).
b. The Law of Large Numbers says that if you get two big enough samples, there will be coincidences of phrasing. Without some way of determining what a baseline level of coincidences is, there's no way to say that the ones identified here are so far away from the norm that they suggest something other than coincidence.

If there were some way to compare 100 pairs of 50,000 word blocks of text from random late 19th century writers, and determine that for every 10,000 words there will be 3.2 occasions where strings of 5 words match, but if you analyze the pairing of Sanders and Erdnase and you get a rate 3 standard deviations above that, then that would be much more convincing.

Bill Mullins
Posts: 5911
Joined: January 17th, 2008, 12:00 pm
Location: Huntsville, AL
Contact:

Re: ERDNASE

Postby Bill Mullins » December 31st, 2020, 4:24 pm

Another thing -- I think that most of Sanders' writing in which the unusual phrase matches are found post-dates 1902. If we accept that Sanders was in fact interested in card play at a level that suggests he could have written Expert, then isn't even more likely that he was a reader of Expert, and it influenced him so much that phrases from it crept into his own work? When August Derleth wrote of eldritch lore and the Great Old Ones and other tropes from the Cthulhu Mythos, it didn't mean that he was Lovecraft's alter ego, it meant that he was influenced by Lovecraft. You've got to rule out that possibility before concluding that Sanders and Erdnase were the same.

Bob Coyne
Posts: 717
Joined: January 26th, 2008, 12:00 pm
Favorite Magician: Charlies [sic]
Location: New York, NY

Re: ERDNASE

Postby Bob Coyne » December 31st, 2020, 8:49 pm

Bill Mullins wrote:Another thing -- I think that most of Sanders' writing in which the unusual phrase matches are found post-dates 1902. If we accept that Sanders was in fact interested in card play at a level that suggests he could have written Expert, then isn't even more likely that he was a reader of Expert, and it influenced him so much that phrases from it crept into his own work? When August Derleth wrote of eldritch lore and the Great Old Ones and other tropes from the Cthulhu Mythos, it didn't mean that he was Lovecraft's alter ego, it meant that he was influenced by Lovecraft. You've got to rule out that possibility before concluding that Sanders and Erdnase were the same.

I guess it's possible that Sanders read and was influenced by Erdnase. While it's a possibility, it doesn't seem like a more likely explanation. For one thing, I've read some magicians obviously influenced by Erdnase's writing style, and it always sounds like a poor imitative copy! You'd also have to discount any apparent influence that flows in the opposite direction. For example, Erdnase constructs patter around mining/prospecting and archaeological preservation (both Sanders' professions) and shows interest in name origins and dialectical speech (both of which Sanders was already demonstrably interested and knowledgeable about). And there's also the issue of "Erdnase" itself meaning "earth nose" with the mining/prospecting connotations.

It's true that a good chunk of Sanders' writing was post 1902 (his 25th college reunion text; the Montana naming article; some short mining articles; and that amazing "exhuming" mining letter that you were the first to discover). The pre-1902 texts that I'm aware of are his diaries, some of the other Montana Historical Society writing, and the two mining articles that were incorporated into Mine Timbering later on. I haven't noticed any dramatic shift in Sanders more analytic writing style pre- and post- Erdnase (e.g. in his mining or historical articles). Also, the two Sanders' passages that mirror Erdnases' "exhuming moss-covered ruses" paragraph are on opposite sides of the 1902 divide. His college 1910 college reunion writing (very humorous, inventive, and playful) has no real analog in pre-1902 Sanders, though maybe some of that flavor comes through in his diaries which I haven't seen).

The textual evidence doesn't have to rule out all possibilities and/or carry the full burden of establishing the likelihood that they're the same person. Just as having the decks of cards, playing with anagrams on his name, or writing down the key to the magic trick don't need to individually prove it either. They all contribute to the total case. How you weigh the combined evidence and whether you think it makes a convincing enough case is ultimately a judgement call. I think it does, even if it's not iron-clad.

Brad Henderson
Posts: 4546
Joined: January 17th, 2008, 12:00 pm
Location: austin, tx

Re: ERDNASE

Postby Brad Henderson » January 1st, 2021, 12:35 pm

Bob

1) don’t tell me what to do
2) monkey scale is not an insult. It’s a reference - and one to the example given and not to you

May be employed advantageously under - is not a uniquely meaningful phrase even if you cannot find many examples of it. It conveys nothing unique as to content nor is it particularly beautiful. It is a combination of highly mundane words used to convey a highly mundane meaning.

Now if you had found this turn of phrase used multiples times by both men - a sort of authors tick, as it were - then maybe.

But put enough monkeys in enough rooms with enough typewriters (assuming monkeys are already versed in typing full words in the English language) and it’s not surprising at all that two of them stumbled upon the same 5 word sequence. Especially given the frequency that each of these words occurs in the english language. The only interesting word is advantageous- and the topics of both texts suggests that word is likely to come up, not quirks of authorship.

3) if you can’t stand the heat . . .

Bob Coyne
Posts: 717
Joined: January 26th, 2008, 12:00 pm
Favorite Magician: Charlies [sic]
Location: New York, NY

Re: ERDNASE

Postby Bob Coyne » January 1st, 2021, 4:03 pm

Brad Henderson wrote:Bob

1) don’t tell me what to do
2) monkey scale is not an insult. It’s a reference - and one to the example given and not to you

May be employed advantageously under - is not a uniquely meaningful phrase even if you cannot find many examples of it. It conveys nothing unique as to content nor is it particularly beautiful. It is a combination of highly mundane words used to convey a highly mundane meaning.

Now if you had found this turn of phrase used multiples times by both men - a sort of authors tick, as it were - then maybe.

But put enough monkeys in enough rooms with enough typewriters (assuming monkeys are already versed in typing full words in the English language) and it’s not surprising at all that two of them stumbled upon the same 5 word sequence. Especially given the frequency that each of these words occurs in the english language. The only interesting word is advantageous- and the topics of both texts suggests that word is likely to come up, not quirks of authorship.

3) if you can’t stand the heat . . .

Yes, I know perfectly well "monkey scale" was a reference. I wasn't talking about that. You said "I don’t think you understand what a unique turn of phrase means." And that's insulting. You have no idea what I understand or not.

Language is largely used to convey mundane meanings. And a writer's choice of those mundane words and phrases is a part of what defines their particular style. It is not necessary for stylistically significant text to be a "uniquely meaningful phrase" or "beautiful." Think of all the times Erdnase uses the word "employ." This has been noticed many times as a word (with related phrasings) that he uses. It so happens that Sanders also uses that extensively. So it's definitely part of a style. And you could argue that style is to some degree determined by the subject matter and domain (technical writing for sleights or mining etc). But nonetheless, it is part of a style. And furthermore, the particular phrase I identified using that term is both part of that style and highly uncommon.

Yeah monkeys typing forever will eventually write Shakespeare. We're not talking about that amount of text. Instead, Erdnase is about 50K words, and Sanders is roughly the equivalent (maybe 100k?). So the chances of the two of them happening to have so many phrases in common, especially rare combinations, is astronomically lower than your room of monkeys.

haha, you think your comments are heat? I just think they border on rude. But if that's how you want to behave, then go ahead. I just think it detracts from the discussion and is totally unnecessary.

Bob Coyne
Posts: 717
Joined: January 26th, 2008, 12:00 pm
Favorite Magician: Charlies [sic]
Location: New York, NY

Re: ERDNASE

Postby Bob Coyne » January 1st, 2021, 4:44 pm

One more point on this particular duplicated phrase that I think is significant. It's not just the extremely uncommon match of "MAY BE EMPLOYED ADVANTAGEOUSLY UNDER" but also also what follows. Sanders and Erdnase both qualify its applicability with respect to the conditions or circumstances. So there's further alignment of meaning in the extended phrase even beyond what's conveyed in those five words.

Erdnase: we shall describe several processes that MAY BE EMPLOYED ADVANTAGEOUSLY UNDER SPECIAL CIRCUMSTANCES.
Sanders: Such shafts are particularly well adapted to firm ground, but they MAY BE EMPLOYED ADVANTAGEOUSLY UNDER ALL CONDITIONS, EXCEPT WHERE ...

I think it's important to take note of multiple prongs of alignment (lexical matches, phrasal structure, semantics, metaphor, etc). In my document, I highlight or otherwise make note of whatever seems relevant in each of the pairings. Generally, it's not just sequences of exact word matches, though examples of that sort provide a good entry point, and MagicbyAlfred's list of those is now included in an Appendix.

sauerweb
Posts: 1
Joined: January 1st, 2021, 6:46 pm
Favorite Magician: Ricky Jay

Re: ERDNASE

Postby sauerweb » January 1st, 2021, 7:32 pm

For comparison's sake, this phrase also appears in The Journal of Animal Behavior, volume 2, 1912.

Hunter: for the method may be employed advantageously under widely differing conditions

As with Erdnase and Sanders, there's further alignment of meaning in the extended phrase even beyond what's conveyed in those 5 words.

One thing that bothers me. Why were those 5 words chosen specifically? My suspicion is selection bias at work. A couple observations that might lead credence to that idea:

1) If you search for the extra word at the end of the phrase in Erdnase's usage, "may be employed advantageously under special," now we have zero matches.
2) If you remove a word from Erdnase and search for "may be employed advantageously," google's book search shows more matches than I can count.

Sometimes the search for Erdnase reminds me of the search for Jack The Ripper. There are many books that propose various candidates for Jack The Ripper. Most of them make a convincing case unless you come in with enough background information and a skeptical mind. Why? I think two reasons. Authors tend to jump all over coincidences that line up and ignore any information to the contrary. Also, most people back then died without leave a footprint behind. The "best" candidates for Jack The Ripper tend to be the ones with the most material to sift through and find more coincidences. In my opinion this is happening with Sanders.

Bob Coyne
Posts: 717
Joined: January 26th, 2008, 12:00 pm
Favorite Magician: Charlies [sic]
Location: New York, NY

Re: ERDNASE

Postby Bob Coyne » January 1st, 2021, 8:16 pm

Sauerweb,

All these textual examples reinforce each other. They show that the two authors write in very similar manner (linguistically, stylistically, and in terms of the themes, topics, and metaphors they invoke). Among the textual overlaps are many that are very unusual (such as this one); while others are less so on their own but help reinforce a sense of two writers' overall voice.

It's hard for me to imagine looking at the whole set of examples without getting a strong sense that the writing of two men is very similar, i.e. not at all what you'd expect by chance. This is supported both by the number of overlaps and the specificity of some of them. While it's possible that two different people wrote in the same way and invoked the same themes, it becomes much less likely when you consider that we're restricting the pool to those who could have plausibly written EATCT. Once you take into account other evidence for Sanders (use of anagrams, decks of cards, notes about a magic trick, gambling involvement, etc), then it seems that he is very likely to be the author.

Bill Mullins
Posts: 5911
Joined: January 17th, 2008, 12:00 pm
Location: Huntsville, AL
Contact:

Re: ERDNASE

Postby Bill Mullins » January 2nd, 2021, 1:00 am

Occasionally the subject of reversed names comes up here. I've just run across two more, in the last two days.

Remlap AL -- a small town south of me that is named for the Palmer family, who live in the area.

Aloris tool posts are a type of fixture for mounting tools on a machinist's lathe. They are named for the inventor, Frank Silora.

Bob Coyne
Posts: 717
Joined: January 26th, 2008, 12:00 pm
Favorite Magician: Charlies [sic]
Location: New York, NY

Re: ERDNASE

Postby Bob Coyne » January 2nd, 2021, 4:18 pm

Bill Mullins wrote:Occasionally the subject of reversed names comes up here. I've just run across two more, in the last two days.

Remlap AL -- a small town south of me that is named for the Palmer family, who live in the area.

Aloris tool posts are a type of fixture for mounting tools on a machinist's lathe. They are named for the inventor, Frank Silora.

Cool to find them applied to things other than the people they were derived from :-) I added those to the others in the appendix in my sanders/erdnase document.

I ran across one myself a little while ago (that I don't think I've seen mentioned before):

Samuel Sheppard (1624-1655) wrote under pseudonym (and inexact anagram) of Raphael Desmus

Brad Henderson
Posts: 4546
Joined: January 17th, 2008, 12:00 pm
Location: austin, tx

Re: ERDNASE

Postby Brad Henderson » January 2nd, 2021, 4:25 pm

The confirmation bias in Bob’s work is clear.

It reminds me more of Qanon and bible code ravings than actual scholarship. Bill Mullins (and most recently Sauerweb) has pointed out the reasons for this - until you find a baseline of usage for other authors in that time, the linguistic comparisons are meaningless. You have to control for literary influences that may be common to many writers. Etc.

There is one Erdnase hunter who has found thousands of coincidences of numbers, ink smears, indentations, and paper markings. If you look long enough you can find whatever it is you want to find.

Bill Mullins
Posts: 5911
Joined: January 17th, 2008, 12:00 pm
Location: Huntsville, AL
Contact:

Re: ERDNASE

Postby Bill Mullins » January 3rd, 2021, 2:44 am

Bill Mullins wrote:Aloris tool posts are a type of fixture for mounting tools on a machinist's lathe. They are named for the inventor, Frank Silora.


As was kindly pointed out off-list, I made a typo here. The inventor's name is Frank Sirola.

MagicbyAlfred
Posts: 2388
Joined: June 7th, 2015, 12:48 pm
Favorite Magician: Bill Malone
Location: Myrtle Beach, SC

Re: ERDNASE

Postby MagicbyAlfred » January 3rd, 2021, 3:58 am

Bill Mullins wrote:
Bill Mullins wrote:Aloris tool posts are a type of fixture for mounting tools on a machinist's lathe. They are named for the inventor, Frank Silora.


As was kindly pointed out off-list, I made a typo here. The inventor's name is Frank Sirola.


Perhaps it was not so much a typo as it was a Freudian anagram...

Bob Coyne
Posts: 717
Joined: January 26th, 2008, 12:00 pm
Favorite Magician: Charlies [sic]
Location: New York, NY

Re: ERDNASE

Postby Bob Coyne » January 3rd, 2021, 10:41 am

Brad Henderson wrote:The confirmation bias in Bob’s work is clear.

It reminds me more of Qanon and bible code ravings than actual scholarship. Bill Mullins (and most recently Sauerweb) has pointed out the reasons for this - until you find a baseline of usage for other authors in that time, the linguistic comparisons are meaningless. You have to control for literary influences that may be common to many writers. Etc.

Brad, you've just thrown out hundreds of years of literary scholarship on practically every author. Scholars routinely identify parallel passages both within and across texts. e.g even something as simple as one line early on foreshadowing something later. As human beings we are attuned to patterns in both style and meaning. We couldn't function if we weren't generally accurate when we do that.

And as I've pointed out, you can usually identify someone's voice without seeing them or visually recognize someone at a distance just by their general stance and gait. Or recognizing someone's handwriting. Of to take an extreme case, recognizing any person or object you see right in front of you. Sure you could be wrong if you're in a stupor, deranged, or hallucinating. Or when the phenomena is ambiguous or too vague. But, in general, this is just what our perceptual system can do without any need to do a statistical analysis. The same goes with written text, though there is admittedly more uncertainty. But nonetheless, the same principle applies.

So I don't know if you just don't perceive the similarities (with Erdnase/Sanders) and/or if you are looking for proof and only trust quantitative statistical arguments. Regarding the latter, as I've also pointed out, it's not a choice between proof and meaningless pareidolia (seeing patterns that aren't really there). It's a question of whether the textual similarities as perceived are significant enough to add to the overall evidence. Any additional evidence involving statistical analysis can add (or subtract) from the case. Both perceptual and statistical arguments have inherent uncertainty and a set of assumptions. But it's not necessary to eliminate uncertainty in order to make a judgement.
Last edited by Bob Coyne on January 3rd, 2021, 10:52 am, edited 1 time in total.

Joe Lyons
Posts: 874
Joined: November 13th, 2017, 8:27 am
Favorite Magician: Wonder
Location: Texas

Re: ERDNASE

Postby Joe Lyons » January 3rd, 2021, 10:52 am

MagicbyAlfred wrote:
Bill Mullins wrote:
Bill Mullins wrote:Aloris tool posts are a type of fixture for mounting tools on a machinist's lathe. They are named for the inventor, Frank Silora.


As was kindly pointed out off-list, I made a typo here. The inventor's name is Frank Sirola.


Perhaps it was not so much a typo as it was a Freudian anagram...


Hmmm...Freudian anagram = Nude Fair?


Return to “General”