FYI
That is fascinating MJ. What is the source for this? I'd like to learn more about these scales.
Great name ! Smog Index—cough, cough. [:D]
Interesting. Thanks M.J.
What is the source for this? I'd like to learn more about these scales.
http://www.readability-score.com/
Great name ! Smog Index
I'm rather partial to the Gunning-Fog Score. Target practice in London or SF.
BTW, somewhere in the back of my gunned and fogged brain I remember MS Word used to be able to provide many of those indexes.
What is the source for this? I'd like to learn more about these scales. http://www.readability-score.com/
Thanks. Very interesting.
Thanks for the analysis, MJ. Have to admit, it makes me chuckle knowing that Wright's For Everyone series requires a higher reading level than Hermeneia.
It all depends on how much text you give it to analyze. Unless you're able to get the whole book analyzed I can see these numbers bouncing around a lot. I copied and pasted parts of the introduction to the Gospel of Mark from these study Bibles and got this:
Ryrie Study Bible – Average Score 7.5
MacArthur Study Bible – Average Score 8.2
Apologetics Study Bible – Average Score 10.1
Commentaries (again from intros from Mark):
New American – Average Score 10.2
Baker Exegetical – Average Score 11.6
Pillar – Average Score 11.3
Tyndale – Average Score 12.6
Word – Average Score 10.2
NIGTC – Average Score 12.4
Expositors – Average Score 11.1
NIV App – Average Score 10.8
I enjoyed that as well. Unfortunately, Bible references generally count as short, monosyllablic words, the formulas don't note change of languages etc. But if you pay attention to what the individual scores are and the text you fed in, you do get a sense of what the text actually requires. I tended to avoid the texts closest to what the formulas are designed for.
Available Now
Build your biblical library with a new trusted commentary or resource every month. Yours to keep forever.
