TY - JOUR A1 - Schöch, Christof T1 - Big? Smart? Clean? Messy? Data in the Humanities? JF - Journal of the Digital Humanities N2 - No abstract available. KW - digital humanities Y1 - 2013 U6 - http://nbn-resolving.de/urn/resolver.pl?urn:nbn:de:bvb:20-opus-129492 VL - 2 IS - 3 ER - TY - JOUR A1 - Schöch, Christof T1 - Ein digitales Textformat für die Literaturwissenschaften. Die Richtlinien der Text Encoding Initiative und ihr Nutzen für Textedition und Textanalyse JF - Romanische Studien N2 - Die stetig voranschreitende Digitalisierung literarischer Texte verschiedenster Sprachen, Epochen und Gattungen stellt die Literaturwissenschaften immer wieder vor die Frage, wie sie diese Entwicklung mitgestalten und zu ihrem Vorteil nutzen können. Dabei ist digital nicht gleich digital, sondern es existiert eine Vielzahl sehr unterschiedlicher, digitaler Repräsentationsformen von Text. Nur wenige dieser Repräsentationsformen werden literaturwissenschaftlichen Anforderungen tatsächlich gerecht, darunter diejenige, die den Richtlinien der Text Encoding Initiative folgt. Der vorliegende Beitrag vergleicht zunächst einige derzeit gängige digitale Repräsentationsformen von Text. Für literaturwissenschaftliche Forschung besonders geeignet erweist sich hierbei eine Repräsentationsform, die den Richtlinien der Text Encoding Initiative folgt. Daher informiert der Beitrag anschließend über deren Nutzen für die literaturwissenschaftliche Arbeit, sowohl im Bereich der wissenschaftlichen Textedition als auch im Bereich der Analyse und Interpretation von Texten. Nur wenn die Literaturwissenschaften in ihrer Breite den Nutzen von offenen, expressiven, flexiblen und standardisierten, langfristig nutzbaren Formaten für die Forschung erkennen, können sie sich mit dem erforderlichen Nachdruck für deren Verbreitung einsetzen und durch die zunehmende Verfügbarkeit von Texten in solchen Formaten für die eigene Forschung und Lehre davon profitieren. KW - Digital Humanities KW - Text Encoding Initiative KW - Textedition KW - Textanalyse Y1 - 2016 U6 - http://nbn-resolving.de/urn/resolver.pl?urn:nbn:de:bvb:20-opus-171351 VL - 4 ER - TY - JOUR A1 - Schöch, Christof T1 - Interview mit Prof. Dr. Christof Schöch JF - promptus - Würzburger Beiträge zur Romanistik N2 - Interview mit Prof. Dr. Christof Schöch KW - Interview Y1 - 2020 U6 - http://nbn-resolving.de/urn/resolver.pl?urn:nbn:de:bvb:20-opus-235128 VL - 6 ER - TY - JOUR A1 - Berenike Herrmann, J. A1 - van Dalen-Oskam, Karina A1 - Schöch, Christof T1 - Revisiting Style, a Key Concept in Literary Studies JF - Journal of Literary Theory N2 - Language and literary studies have studied style for centuries, and even since the advent of ›stylistics‹ as a discipline at the beginning of the twentieth century, definitions of ›style‹ have varied heavily across time, space and fields. Today, with increasingly large collections of literary texts being made available in digital form, computational approaches to literary style are proliferating. New methods from disciplines such as corpus linguistics and computer science are being adopted and adapted in interrelated fields such as computational stylistics and corpus stylistics, and are facilitating new approaches to literary style. The relation between definitions of style in established linguistic or literary stylistics, and definitions of style in computational or corpus stylistics has not, however, been systematically assessed. This contribution aims to respond to the need to redefine style in the light of this new situation and to establish a clearer perception of both the overlap and the boundaries between ›mainstream‹ and ›computational‹ and/or ›empirical‹ literary stylistics. While stylistic studies of non-literary texts are currently flourishing, our contribution deliberately centers on those approaches relevant to ›literary stylistics‹. It concludes by proposing an operational definition of style that we hope can act as a common ground for diverse approaches to literary style, fostering transdisciplinary research. The focus of this contribution is on literary style in linguistics and literary studies (rather than in art history, musicology or fashion), on textual aspects of style (rather than production- or reception-oriented theories of style), and on a descriptive perspective (rather than a prescriptive or didactic one). Even within these limits, however, it appears necessary to build on a broad understanding of the various perspectives on style that have been adopted at different times and in different traditions. For this reason, the contribution first traces the development of the notion of style in three different traditions, those of German, Dutch and French language and literary studies. Despite the numerous links between each other, and between each of them to the British and American traditions, these three traditions each have their proper dynamics, especially with regard to the convergence and/or confrontation between mainstream and computational stylistics. For reasons of space and coherence, the contribution is limited to theoretical developments occurring since 1945. The contribution begins by briefly outlining the range of definitions of style that can be encountered across traditions today: style as revealing a higher-order aesthetic value, as the holistic ›gestalt‹ of single texts, as an expression of the individuality of an author, as an artifact presupposing choice among alternatives, as a deviation from a norm or reference, or as any formal property of a text. The contribution then traces the development of definitions of style in each of the three traditions mentioned, with the aim of giving a concise account of how, in each tradition, definitions of style have evolved over time, with special regard to the way such definitions relate to empirical, quantitative or otherwise computational approaches to style in literary texts. It will become apparent how, in each of the three traditions, foundational texts continue to influence current discussions on literary style, but also how stylistics has continuously reacted to broader developments in cultural and literary theory, and how empirical, quantitative or computational approaches have long ­existed, usually in parallel to or at the margins of mainstream stylistics. The review will also reflect the lines of discussion around style as a property of literary texts – or of any textual entity in general. The perspective on three stylistic traditions is accompanied by a more systematic perspective. The rationale is to work towards a common ground for literary scholars and linguists when talking about (literary) style, across traditions of stylistics, with respect for established definitions of style, but also in light of the digital paradigm. Here, we first show to what extent, at similar or different moments in time, the three traditions have developed comparable positions on style, and which definitions out of the range of possible definitions have been proposed or promoted by which authors in each of the three traditions. On the basis of this synthesis, we then conclude by proposing an operational definition of style that is an attempt to provide a common ground for both mainstream and computational literary stylistics. This definition is discussed in some detail in order to explain not only what is meant by each term in the definition, but also how it relates to computational analyses of style – and how this definition aims to avoid some of the pitfalls that can be perceived in earlier definitions of style. Our definition, we hope, will be put to use by a new generation of computational, quantitative, and empirical studies of style in literary texts. KW - literary studies Y1 - 2015 U6 - http://nbn-resolving.de/urn/resolver.pl?urn:nbn:de:bvb:20-opus-194349 SN - 1862-8990 SN - 1862-5290 N1 - This publication is with permission of the rights owner freely accessible due to an Alliance licence and a national licence (funded by the DFG, German Research Foundation) respectively. VL - 9 IS - 1 ER -