MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W2603122835

Ambiguity and the Poets

2008· article· en· W2603122835 sur OpenAlex
Eleanor Cook

Pourquoi ce travail est dans la base

Une base qui oublie comment elle a trouvé un travail ne peut pas être vérifiée. Voici les voies qui ont admis celui-ci.

aboutLe titre ou le résumé porte un signal canadien du lexique géographique.
no affAucune affiliation canadienne : ce travail est invisible pour une base fondée sur la seule affiliation.
Aucune affiliation canadienne. Une base fondée sur la seule affiliation (le devis habituel) n'aurait jamais vu ce travail. C'est l'un des travaux qui justifient l'inversion de la base.

Notice bibliographique

RevueConnotations · 2008
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineArts and Humanities
ThématiqueLexicography and Language Studies
Établissements canadiensnon disponible
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésCasualAmbiguityReputationOrder (exchange)Visitor patternSociologyLawHistoryComputer scienceLaw and economicsLinguisticsPhilosophyPolitical scienceBusiness
DOInon disponible

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

A stranger meeting for first time might well be taken aback by her mixed reputation. She is disliked and avoided in some realms, whereas in others she is welcome. A philosopher like J. L. Austin will patrol streets of language in order to identify in his book, How To Do Things with Words. Ambiguity is bane of translators, who must decide whether it is intentional or merely casual, and ii casual, whether author is careless or lazy or ignorant. We do not want in legislation. Nor do we want it in our wills or in our financial affairs. (Lawyers, of course, like linguists, [consider] as productive because it triggers processes of disambiguation [Bauer par. 6]) Nor do we want in our traffic signs. A recent visitor from Australia, driving on express highway around Toronto, noticed signs for collector lanes. assumed - logically enough - that these were toll highways, collecting money, and so avoided them, overshot city, and was late for dinner. In fact, collector lanes simply siphon off - that is, collect - traffic that is preparing to exit.On other hand, is a useful and even welcome guest in some places. It is excellent device for concealing views. The oracles are said to have used regularly, though these turn out to be literary oracles more than historical ones, as far as we can tell. Macbeth's witches offer a well-known later example. The gods are prone to or amphibology, according to Chaucer's Criseyde: He hath not wel goddes understonde/ For goddes speken in amphibologies,/ And, for a sooth, they teUen twenty lyes [lies] (Troilus and Criseyde IV. 1405-07). In academic Ufe today, also has its uses. Suppose a selection committee for a senior position at your university receives a letter of recommendation on behalf of Professor X. How does it read sentence: You wUl be fortunate indeed if you can get Professor X to work for you. Intentional or not?For a literary scholar and critic, general dimensions of can appear singularly difficult to map. It seems to be not so much unknown land mass as a mythological creature, a Proteus, who changes shape whenever you wish to capture him - Proteus ambiguus, as Ovid calls him (Metamorphoses II.9). This many-sidedness is sometimes blamed on WUUam Empson's weU-known book, Types of Ambiguity, which pubUshed in 1930, in his twenties. Most of his examples are drawn from poetry. It is not a taxonomy, as one might expect from title. As his editor, John Haffenden, puts it: Seven Types of Ambiguity [...] offers less a methodology than Empson's own methodised briUiance (4).1 Pertinent criticism at time objected among other things that Empson [...] been too prodigal in his associative [...] interpretations, and that he too often worried parts without reference to whole (4). But term spread, thanks largely to so-caUed New Critics, though by 1947, one of them, Cleanth Brooks, wrote that held no brief for term ambiguity (or for paradox or irony): they are inadequate. Perhaps they are misleading. It is to be hoped in that case that we can eventuaUy improve upon them (195). By 1957, WUUam K. Wimsatt and Brooks acknowledged that the term 'ambiguity' was perhaps not altogether happy, for this term reflects point of view of expository prose, where one meaning, and only one meaning, is wanted (637). That is, norm for has always included what they call multiple impUcation (638) - a useful enough phrase, if clumsy. In 1958, Roman Jakobson accepted term ambiguity, defining it as an intrinsic, inaUenable character of any self-focussed message, briefly, a corollary feature of poetry (85). went on to quote Empson.2 (Jakobson' s essay, by way, was first pubUshed in English.) Meanwhile, Empson revised his book somewhat for later editions, then about 1973 mischievously wrote to a friend:Reviewers were teUing me, as soon as Ambiguity came out, that not aU was ambiguous, and I could see that method worked best where authors had had some impulse or need for process; but, as it had become my line, I went on slogging at it for two more books. …

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Prédiction distillée sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,000
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesaucune
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Sans objet · Signal consensuel: aucune
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: Empirique
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,868
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,708

Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0000,000
Bibliométrie0,0000,000
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0010,001
Communication savante0,0000,000
Science ouverte0,0000,000
Intégrité de la recherche0,0000,000
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0000,000

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,040
Tête enseignante GPT0,208
Écart entre enseignants0,168 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle