PDA

View Full Version : Whiskey v Whisky



barturtle
12-19-2010, 08:42
Historical usage based on Google's new Ngram Viewer.

11637

barturtle
12-19-2010, 08:45
bourbon whiskey v rye whiskey

11638

barturtle
12-19-2010, 08:46
corn whiskey v rye whiskey

11639

barturtle
12-19-2010, 08:48
bourbon whiskey v malt whisky

11640

barturtle
12-19-2010, 08:49
bourbon v scotch

11641

T Comp
12-19-2010, 11:47
Yes indeed this is a pretty cool tool I've been playing around with this morning too. Check out bourbon versus vodka with vodka roaring past bourbon as far back as 1850 and even earlier against whiskey or whisky. That certainly surprised me.

barturtle
12-19-2010, 12:01
rum,vodka,whiskey,gin,brandy

11642

T Comp
12-19-2010, 13:12
Yes indeed this is a pretty cool tool I've been playing around with this morning too. Check out bourbon versus vodka with vodka roaring past bourbon as far back as 1850 and even earlier against whiskey or whisky. That certainly surprised me.


rum,vodka,whiskey,gin,brandy

11642

It looks like my eyes and brain this morning still hadn't adjusted to matching up the blue and red correctly, at least on the vodka to whiskey or whisky comparison. Thanks for the correction barturtle. May have had something to do with my last night Christmas party and an extra helping of Van Winkle good cheer :grin: .

barturtle
12-19-2010, 13:27
I find it interesting to see these major categories all on one.

Look how long gin out-referenced vodka and whiskey, and I'm guessing the bump back up in the 1920s was of the bathtub sort.

I wouldn't have thought of brandy and rum being more written about so recently (1970s)

barturtle
12-19-2010, 13:30
jack daniels,jim beam

11643

OscarV
12-19-2010, 15:37
A few observations of Ngram Viewer by assorted users.

Shawn
1 day agoMark as spam (http://www.googlelabs.com/show_details?app_key=agtnbGFiczIwLXd3d3IVCxIMTGFic 0FwcE1vZGVsGOnEuQIM#)
This googlelab is riddled with mistakes. Even the example Google uses to show the graphs isn't correct. If you look at the World War I and Great War books that were written pre-1900, they turn out to primarily be history books whose original publishing date was pre-1900 but then had subsequent versions created. The sensitivity on this tool is VERY high yet the specificity is so subpar as to create a relatively useless utility when looking at how introduction of the specific word or phrase takes place.
OR
Claudio 1 day agoMark as spam (http://www.googlelabs.com/show_details?app_key=agtnbGFiczIwLXd3d3IVCxIMTGFic 0FwcE1vZGVsGOnEuQIM#)
Great idea!! It would be VERY COOL if it work with Google Scholar too!!!
OR
Oliver 2 days agoMark as spam (http://www.googlelabs.com/show_details?app_key=agtnbGFiczIwLXd3d3IVCxIMTGFic 0FwcE1vZGVsGOnEuQIM#)
Here's at least one mistake:
http://books.google.com/books?id=rtC2AAAAIAAJ&q=%22Facebook%22&dq=%22Facebook%22&hl=en&ei=CLkLTeWWNIP68Aa0meTcDQ&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=9&ved=0CE8Q6AEwCA
"Facebook, the fastest growing social network.." in 1976?

barturtle
12-19-2010, 17:51
While I'm sure the data is not 100% accurate (I've rarely seen a dataset that was) With few exceptions, I'm sure it's close enough for our nonscientific uses.

I'm sure it was noticed in the bourbon v scotch chart that there was a huge spike in the 1800's for bourbon, that would be the Royal Bourbon family. I'm sure that other uses get in there to for the various search terms, but in general most of the data is likely good enough.

...and heck, it's just kinda fun, too.

cowdery
12-22-2010, 15:26
And 'scotch' would probably pick up references to scotch tape, scotch eggs, etc.

squire
12-22-2010, 15:31
Interesting to read but that's the sort of stuff I quickly forget.

barturtle
12-22-2010, 16:31
And 'scotch' would probably pick up references to scotch tape, scotch eggs, etc.

True, that's my most of my graphs have contained paired terms "rye whiskey" instead of "rye", should net a finer resolution of results.

B.B. Babington
12-23-2010, 07:37
this is cool, first I've heard of it. it looks like ngram only works with books, and not articles. ngram does normalize data based on number of books printed per year so values aren't skewed for modern years when more books are printed. But, it looks like maybe ngram only hits about 4% of all books - and maybe most of those are public domain. So, maybe it doesn't hit Chuck's book unless he's made a copy available online for free.

Or, I may stand corrected on what's entered. It is only 4% of all books but it may include representative sampling of new books scanned in for research purposes. I started to read the original AAAS Science article on the research project but didn't go ahead and join for fear of yet more spam. If I get the courage to weather it, I'll read the article and let ya know.

I found google is also making a lot of it's ngram reseach available for free to the public (some through U. of Pennsylvania project). It includes reseach for all web pages that it has listed in it's search engine. But one can do simple study by typing in a phrase in the search engine, record the number of hits, and type in another phrase and record the hits. Of course that doesn't give any change in usage versus time, just total on the net at that time. It's kind of how some authors do spell check with google to see what is more common spelling of word or to check grammer for different ways to form a phrase.

flintlock
12-23-2010, 19:31
Interesting how all alcohol drops off steadily after WW2...