Advice for Smart SEO Choices
August 11, 2015
We’ve come across a well-penned article about the intersection of language and search engine optimization by The SEO Guy. Self-proclaimed word-aficionado Ben Kemp helps website writers use their words wisely in, “Language, Linguistics, Semantics, & Search.” He begins by discrediting the practice of keyword stuffing, noting that search-ranking algorithms are more sophisticated than some give them credit for. He writes:
“Search engine algorithms assess all the words within the site. These algorithms may be bereft of direct human interpretation but are based on mathematics, knowledge, experience and intelligence. They deliver very accurate relevance analysis. In the context of using related words or variations within your website, it is one good way of reinforcing the primary keyword phrase you wish to rank for, without over-use of exact-match keywords and phrases. By using synonyms, and a range of relevant nouns, verbs and adjectives, you may eliminate excessive repetition and more accurately describe your topic or theme and at the same time, increase the range of word associations your website will rank for.”
Kemp goes on to lament the dumbing down of English-language education around the world, blaming the trend for a dearth of deft wordsmiths online. Besides recommending that his readers open a thesaurus now and then, he also advises them to make sure they spell words correctly, not because algorithms can’t figure out what they meant to say (they can), but because misspelled words look unprofessional. He even supplies a handy list of the most often misspelled words.
The development of more and more refined search algorithms, it seems, presents the opportunity for websites to craft better copy. See the article for more of Kemp’s language, and SEO, guidance.
Cynthia Murrell, August 11, 2015
Sponsored by ArnoldIT.com, publisher of the CyberOSINT monograph
Predicting Plot Holes Isn’t So Easy
April 10, 2015
According to The Paris Review’s blog post “Man In Hole II: Man In Deeper Hole” Mathew Jockers created an analysis tool to predict archetypal book plots:
A rough primer: Jockers uses a tool called “sentiment analysis” to gauge “the relationship between sentiment and plot shape in fiction”; algorithms assign every word in a novel a positive or negative emotional value, and in compiling these values he’s able to graph the shifts in a story’s narrative. A lot of negative words mean something bad is happening, a lot of positive words mean something good is happening. Ultimately, he derived six archetypal plot shapes.”
Academics, however, found some problems with Jockers’s tool, such as is it possible to assign all words an emotional variance and can all plots really take basic forms? The problem is that words are as nuanced as human emotion, perspectives change in an instant, and sentiments are subjective. How would the tool rate sarcasm?
All stories have been broken down into seven basic plots, so why can it not be possible to do the same for book plots? Jockers already identified six basic book plots and there are some who are curiously optimistic about his analysis tool. It does beg the question if will staunch author’s creativity or if it will make English professors derive even more subjective meaning from Ulysses?
Whitney Grace, April 10, 2015
Stephen E Arnold, Publisher of CyberOSINT at www.xenky.com
-
- Subscribe to Beyond Search
Feature archive
News archive
-
