You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
LexStat is a statistical algorithm for detecting cognates. It would be good to add this as another cognate identification method. It is implemented in the LingPy library.
List, J.-M. (2012). LexStat: Automatic Detection of Cognates in Multilingual Wordlists. In Proceedings of the EACL 2012 Joint Workshop of LINGVIS & UNCLH (pp. 117–125).
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
Has anyone done a comparison of the methods implemented by Cog vs. LexStat/LingPy? I'm curious whether one is better at detecting cognates than the other, since I'm trying to decide which one to use.
Unfortunately, I am not aware of any comparisons between the approaches. The primary cognate identification approach that Cog implements is called the Blair method. I have always wanted to include other cognate identification methods in Cog, such as LexStat, so that users could try out different approaches. I have just never had time to do it.
LexStat is a statistical algorithm for detecting cognates. It would be good to add this as another cognate identification method. It is implemented in the LingPy library.
List, J.-M. (2012). LexStat: Automatic Detection of Cognates in Multilingual Wordlists. In Proceedings of the EACL 2012 Joint Workshop of LINGVIS & UNCLH (pp. 117–125).
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: