Not signed in (Sign In)
    •  
      CommentAuthornigredo
    • CommentTimeDec 19th 2010
     (9328.1)
    Has anybody been having fun looking words and concepts up on the Google Ngram Viewer?
    •  
      CommentAuthorNygaard
    • CommentTimeDec 19th 2010
     (9328.2)
  1.  (9328.3)
    Immature? Yes, but still damned interesting.
  2.  (9328.4)
  3.  (9328.5)
    •  
      CommentAuthorNygaard
    • CommentTimeDec 20th 2010
     (9328.6)
    @David Matthew - actually kind of fascinating; the fall of the gothic minuscule mapped out. I wonder if those tiny bumps around 1920 and the 90's to 00's reflect anything?
  4.  (9328.7)
    I wonder if those tiny bumps around 1920 and the 90's to 00's reflect anything?

    In wartime, ships are sunk and people write about it, afterward. My guess for the 20s and 40s bumps
    •  
      CommentAuthornigredo
    • CommentTimeDec 20th 2010
     (9328.8)


    That bump around the 1900 mark is easily explained and reveals at least one shortcoming of the process...
  5.  (9328.9)
    I've been having fun looking up swear words on it, along with the word 'dog' and 'pony' for no real reason. It's rather amusing.
  6.  (9328.10)
    I'm not so concerned with the obviously explicable OCR errors as the totally inexplicable ones.

    For example, I find extensive records for "wookies" and "Jedi" during the early 20th century. Whence these furry beasts and force users, oh Google?
    •  
      CommentAuthornigredo
    • CommentTimeDec 21st 2010
     (9328.11)
    Same thing.
    •  
      CommentAuthortaphead
    • CommentTimeDec 21st 2010
     (9328.12)
    GEORGE CLINTON WAS RIGHT

    • CommentAuthorKradlum
    • CommentTimeDec 21st 2010 edited
     (9328.13)
    The strange bumps at the beginning of the century for phrases you wouldn't expect to occur then seem to be from periodicals. If a periodical was first published in 1900, it seems it logs all issues of that periodical as having the date of the first one (or at least that's what my experiments with "genetic modification" indicate).

    Words such as Jedi, had other uses (it seems to crop up a lot in Shakespeare's Coriolanus, because it is a mis-scanning of AEdi, short for AEdiles), and Wookie is an English surname (unlike Wookiee).

    You can click on the links below the graphs to see the publications where the words are used.
  7.  (9328.14)
    @Kradlum Thanks, that's an answer that'll help me explain future anomalies on my own.
    •  
      CommentAuthornigredo
    • CommentTimeDec 21st 2010
     (9328.15)
    That's what I meant earlier. The answer is that the software misreads characters in the pdfs. If you click on the links, you get the individual references.
    •  
      CommentAuthorsmileyfish
    • CommentTimeDec 22nd 2010 edited
     (9328.16)




    Interesting toy!