Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Isabella Lucy Bird, one of the most famous Victorian traveling ladies, was born on October 15 in 1831. From 1854 to 1901, she had been to Canada, Australia, Hawaii, Colorado, Japan, Malaya, India, Middle East, China, Korea, and Morocco. She wrote and published her abundant traveling experiences. Among her twelve published travelogues, I chose Unbeaten Tracks in Japan as my thesis project. This thesis investigates Isabella Bird’s subject position. The research methodology I employ to examine this question is Sara Mills’ discourse theory. Mills adopts Foucault’s notion of “discourse” to analyze nineteenth-century women travelers’ writings. Chapter One investigates why Bird adopts the letter form to construct her travel writings, and how Bird’s letter writing does not conform to the parameter of traditional letter writing and further examines the connections between colonial and feminine discourse, and epistolary writing. Chapter Two focuses on the colonial discourse that impinges on the textual construction of Bird’s travel narratives. First it illustrates how Europeans define non-Europeans by imperialistic/colonialist viewpoints. The chapter also shows that there is another anti-colonial narrative position that undercuts colonial stance. Chapter Three deals with feminine discourse. To be more specific, I examine the close relationship between the historical context and Bird’s feminine subject position. That is to say, I examine how the femininity that circulated in the Victorian period determines the construction of Bird’s travel narratives. In this way, we can know distinctly the conflict between discourses, especially colonial and feminine ones.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.012 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".