From Chapter 6 it follows that on the basis of the five discriminator words (Trautmann 1971) it is not possible to exclude a common authorship for the thirteen plays (chi-square = 2.643; df=12, P=0.05). As I have argued, a word-frequency test which is useful with large texts appears not to be suitable for relatively short texts such as the Trivandrum plays. Furthermore, the hypothesis of theme and genre specificity of words, even those for battle, appears not to be valid. However, taking other words into consideration, a division within the group might be possible. On the basis of the distribution and frequency of the particles iva and na, a number of groups then might be discerned. Middle, and therefore rather uncertain positions are occupied by the Avimâraka (high - middle percentage; possibly belonging to group four), and the Bâlacarita (middle - low percentage; between group three and four).
In addition, regarding the distribution of the words for battle as well as the words for "now'', the two Râmâyana-plays differ considerably, and therefore it is not very likely that they have been written by one single author, although this cannot be excluded on the basis of these words only. However, it is confirmed by the iva-na distribution.
Regarding the intensive, the Avimâraka might stand apart from the remainder, but this intensive seems to have been employed on purpose, so this single intensive is not very conclusive. Regarding the use of desideratives and their derivatives, it appears that in each iva - na group one or more plays employs (one of) them.
The distribution of the words as listed by Schokker (1966:330-351 (appendix IV)) yields the following three observations, which are only observations and therefore not evidence. Firstly, the last act of the Svapnavâsavadatta may have been added at a later time, considering the occurrence of the early classical combination api nâma in 6.15c. This is confirmed by the na-distribution. Secondly, the Ûrubhanga and the Karnabhâra might have been written after the fourth century as the first contains an early classical word - avagâdha in 1.18c -, and the latter a Kâlidâsan word - maulimani in 1.16b -. The same applies to the Abhisheka with its Kâlidâsan word manasija in 2.21d. And finally, all thirteen plays would originate from before the seventh century if the lack of Bâna words is conclusive. As the absence of words proves not much more than that that specific word apparently was not employed, the lack of Bâna words is not strong evidence.