Search Results

No Access

Javier> Cha

of this article. This article also benefited a great deal from my interaction with Korean academics involved in humanities computing, digital humanities, or cultural contents studies during a trip to Seoul in July 2014. Our conversations provided me with the background information and important

No Access

Tobias Blanke, Elena Pierazzo and Peter A. Stokes

This article provides an overview of digital humanities activities that relate to publishing. Digital humanities is a growing scholarly domain, defi nitions of which vary but which generally involves the application of computers to research questions that fall within the traditional remit of the humanities. It includes many areas of research that overlap with publishing. An important aspect of digital humanities is therefore to question assumptions that digital publishing should produce faithful visual reproductions. We argue that this cannot be the only objective of digital humanities publishing, and rather that publishing needs to be understood as a range of modelling activities that aim to develop and communicate interpretations, whether consciously or not. The article introduces a selection of digital humanities publishing standards and systems that support a fl exible digital representations of objects, such as the Text Encoding Initiative (TEI), which emphasizes scholarly fl exibility and collaboration.

Open Access

Caroline T. Schroeder

Although the study of the Bible was central to early Humanities Computing efforts, now Biblical Studies and Religious Studies are marginal disciplines in the emerging field known as Digital Humanities (English, History, Library Science, for example, are much more influential in DH.) This paper explores two questions: First, what does it mean for Biblical Studies to be marginal to the Digital Humanities when DH is increasingly seen as the locus of as transformation in the humanities? Second, how can our expertise in Biblical Studies influence and shape Digital Humanities for the better? Digital Humanities, I argue, constitutes a powerful emerging field with which Biblical Studies and Religious Studies must engage as critical participants or analysts. Moreover, our own field’s expertise on the history of canon, orthodoxy, and commentary can contribute to shaping a more inclusive and self-critical Digital Humanities.

Open Access

James A. Libby

“Fragmentation” is a well-worn watchword in contemporary biblical studies. But is endless fragmentation across the traditional domains of epistemology, methodology and hermeneutics the inevitable future for the postmodern exercise of biblical scholarship? In our view, multiple factors mitigate against such a future, but two command our attention here. First, digital humanities itself, through its principled use of corpora, databases and computer-based methods, seems to be remarkably capable of producing findings with high levels of face validity (interpretive agreement) across multiple hermeneutical perspectives and communities. Second, and perhaps more subversively, there is a substantial body of practitioners that, per Kearney, actively question postmodernity’s impress as the final port of call for philosophy. For these practitioners deconstruction has become both indispensable — by delegitimizing hegemonies — but, in its own way, metanarratival by stultifying all other iterative, dialectical and critical processes that have historically motivated scholarship. Sensing this impasse, Kearney (1987, pp. 43-45) proposes a reimagining that is not only critical but that also embraces ποίησις, the possibility of optimistic, creative work. Such a stance within digital humanities would affirm that poietic events emerge not only through frictions and fragmentation (e.g. Kinder and McPherson 2014, pp. xiii-xviii) but also through commonalties and convergence. Our approach here will be to demonstrate such a reimagining, rather than to argue for it, using two worked examples in the Greek New Testament (GNT). Those examples – digital humanities-enabled papyrology and digital humanities-enabled statistical linguistics – demonstrate ways in which the data of the text itself can be used to interrogate our perspectives and suggest that our perspectives must remain ever open to such inquiries. We conclude with a call for digital humanities to further leverage its notable strengths to cast new light on old problems not only in biblical studies, but across the spectrum of the humanities.

No Access

Series:

Terttu Nevalainen, Carla Suhr and and Irma Taavitsainen

1 Digital Linguistics: Approaches and Developments The past ten years have seen the rapid rise of Digital Humanities (DH), which currently subsumes a wide range of digital activities in various humanities disciplines, including linguistics and philology. One often-quoted definition of DH comes from

No Access

Series:

Edited by Claire Clivaz, Andrew Gregory and David Hamidović

Ancient texts, once written by hand on parchment and papyrus, are now increasingly discoverable online in newly digitized editions, and their readers now work online as well as in traditional libraries. So what does this mean for how scholars may now engage with these texts, and for how the disciplines of biblical, Jewish and Christian studies might develop? These are the questions that contributors to this volume address. Subjects discussed include textual criticism, palaeography, philology, the nature of ancient monotheism, and how new tools and resources such as blogs, wikis, databases and digital publications may transform the ways in which contemporary scholars engage with historical sources. Contributors attest to the emergence of a conscious recognition of something new in the way that we may now study ancient writings, and the possibilities that this new awareness raises.
No Access

Marcel Lepper

between the diffuse rhetoric of dangers observed in the various literary disciplines and the experimental practices of the digital humanities. A similar problem is evidenced in the oversimplifications of (otherwise responsible) contemporaries such as Sibylle Lewitscharoff. In her Büchner Prize address of

Open Access

Bill Endres

This essay examines complexities that attend digitizing a cultural heritage artifact that is sacred to a contemporary community. It argues that scholars must first determine how the artifact participates in the life of its community. If this participation is integral, scholars should treat the artifact as a present-day cultural phenomenon, inseparable from its community. To explain the implications of this shift, the author turns to ethnography, which has a lengthy tradition of interacting with communities for generating research. Photographing a sacred artifact is not unlike other ethnographic research, whether tape recording stories, collecting documents, or gathering information about social practices. To guide digital work, the essay proposes ethnographic ethical principles, demonstrating their value in digitizing the 8th-century St Chad Gospels at Lichfield Cathedral, England—supporting Jamie Bianco's recent call for an "ethical turn" in the digital humanities.

Open Access

Documentation of Palu’e

Storytelling and folklore

Stefan Danerek

This paper presents Palu’e storytelling on the basis of the on-going work with the Palu’e audio collection, created in the context of language/oral traditions documentation. The main aim is to show that the collection is a research resource for the humanities by discussing and comparing items which are referenced and accessible in the Kaipuleohone Ethnographic Archive. While the contents of the collection are showcased for this specific presentation, the intention is directed towards the body of digital humanities collections. The problems of what genres should be included, definitions, method of analysis, are discussed and put to the test. Recordings initially focused on oral literature, but expanded to include personal narratives with content related to culture and tradition. The cross-referencing between genres and items demonstrates the benefits of a comparative methodology, and suggests ways of using the collection.

No Access

Gila Prebor

) (2003) 101–107. 6 ‘The DigIn: Digital Humanities to Jerusalem,’ http://www.thedigin.org/mebrewmss/ (accessed September 10, 2013). 7 According to Kristin Jensen, a member of the Juxta production team, Juxta Commons has not been tested with Hebrew. However, some users have successfully collated