Literary Forms/Techniques & Methods of Study
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Literary Forms/Techniques & Methods of Study Fred W. Guyette, Thomas Hieke, Michael W. Duggan, Christopher T. Begg, J. Edward Owens, OSST, Richard A. Taylor, and Victor H. Matthews Fred W. Guyette Erskine College and Seminary, Anderson University Thomas Hieke Johannes Gutenberg Universität Mainz Michael W. Duggan Calgary AB, Canada Christopher T. Begg Catholic University of America J. Edward Owens, OSST University of the Incarnate Word, San Antonio TX Richard A. Taylor Dallas Theological Seminary Victor H. Matthews Missouri State University 1919. [The Sending of the Lord's Servants, the Prophetic Formula in the Book of Jeremiah] Nicola Agnoli, "The Motif of 'Sending the Servants of the Lord, the Prophets' in Jeremiah's Book: A Developing Literary Formula for Biblical Prophecy," In Memoriam Francolino Gonçalves, O.P. 1943–2017, 3-14 [see #2540]. A.'s essay draws attention to the distinctive occurrences in Jeremiah and other OT books in which "the servants, the prophets" are expressly presented as envoys of the Lord. This expression occurs a total of 17 times in the OT (2 Kgs 9:7; 17:13; 17:23; 21:10; 24:2; Jer 7:25; 25:4; 26:5; 29:19; 35:15; 44:4; Ezek 38:17; Am 3:7; Zech 1:6; Dan 9:6, 10; and Ezra 9:11). In many instances, the expression announces Israel's doom or exile. In postexilic settings, the expression signifies a reinterpretation of past prophetic experiences. [Adapted from published abstract—F.W.G.] Google Scholar 1920. [Introduction: Authorship in the HB] Sonja Ammann, "What Follows the Death of the Author? Introduction?" Authorship and the Hebrew Bible, 1-16 [see #2529]. In her introduction to the above collection, editor A. first explains how the collection of essays approaches the issue of authorship in the HB: she presents here an overview of recent challenges to the concept of authorship in biblical scholarship. Adopting U. Eco's terminology, she concludes: "the intentio operis and the intentio lectoris have moved to the fore, while the intentio auctoris is considered both inaccessible and largely irrelevant for the interpretation of biblical texts" (p. 4). However, scholars have not abandoned the concept of "author" entirely. A. points to literary studies that still use the concept of authorship in order to place a text in time and space, to posit the unity and coherence of a work, and to establish which texts and contexts can be referred to in the interpretation of a text. Second, A. offers general remarks on the volume's approach. Third, she summarizes the contributions to the collection.—T.H. Google Scholar 1921. [Duality in the Book of Esther] Orit Avnery, "Gender, Ethnicity, Identity: Duality in the Book of Esther," Ve-ʾEd Yaʿaleh (Gen 2:6), Vol. 2, 1099-1121 [see #2546]. A. presents a Bakhtinian approach to the Book of Esther which sets two legitimate but irreconcilable readings of the book in dialogue with each other. Both interpretations view Esther as embodying the situation of diaspora Jews as a minority group responding to the threat of their annihilation by imperial decree. As a woman in a thoroughly patriarchal world, Esther represents Jews of the diaspora as a body of oppressed foreigners, the "Other" in the epicenter of the empire. The distinction between the two readings of the story derives [End Page 721] from their mutually contradictory depictions of Esther's responses to her male handlers. A. provides notes on the complete book (MT) that pinpoint the differences between the two perspectives. The first reading depicts Esther as conforming to the social conventions that dictates her subservience to Mordecai and her discretion in dealing with Ahasuerus as the king's beautiful and courageous foreign wife. The second reading portrays Esther as a strategist who takes initiatives beyond socially prescribed boundaries and succeeds by prompting Mordecai and Ahasuerus to realize her intentions to make life safe for Jews in Persian society. Both readings are essential to understanding the Book of Esther.—M.W.D. Google Scholar 1922. [Nonliteral Use of Numbers in the HB] Adele Berlin, "When Five Is Not 5: The Bible's Nonliteral Use of Numbers," Ve-ʾEd Yaʿaleh (Gen...
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.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi 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.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
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.
score_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 découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».