https://nova.newcastle.edu.au/vital/access/ /manager/Index en-au 5 https://nova.newcastle.edu.au/vital/access/ /manager/Repository/uon:14345 Wed 11 Apr 2018 16:34:35 AEST ]]> https://nova.newcastle.edu.au/vital/access/ /manager/Repository/uon:3674 Wed 11 Apr 2018 16:06:18 AEST ]]> https://nova.newcastle.edu.au/vital/access/ /manager/Repository/uon:3704 Wed 11 Apr 2018 14:48:01 AEST ]]> https://nova.newcastle.edu.au/vital/access/ /manager/Repository/uon:28092 Saturday Review was recognized by Victorians and is often mentioned in modern periodicals scholarship. In this quantitative study, we highlight characteristics that distinguish the journal’s writing from other periodicals in terms of stance rather than political orientation or subject matter. We also compare the writing style of six contributors to the Saturday Review and other periodicals. On one end of the spectrum was George Henry Lewes, who, according to our research, assumed a consistent style when writing for the Saturday Review and any other journal. On the other end of the spectrum was Lord Robert Cecil, whose work for the Saturday Review was strikingly different stylistically than his other writings.]]> Wed 11 Apr 2018 11:10:52 AEST ]]>