MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1502248731

Descriptions as a Functional Semantic Tool in Ike’s Our Children Are Coming

2014· article· en· W1502248731 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Muhammed-Badar Salihu Jibrin

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian social science · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicDiscourse Analysis in Language Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMeaning (existential)Order (exchange)Character (mathematics)Interpretation (philosophy)Projection (relational algebra)ApostasyComputer scienceEpistemologyEconomic JusticeSociologyLinguisticsPhilosophyLawTheology
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper discusses the manner in which Ike, the author of Our Children are Coming uses character-descriptions as a tool for message projection in his novel. It adopts the systemic linguistic approach to the study of texts which bothers much about functionality. It relies on the model designed by Adejare (1992) and Jolayemi (2000) in which texts are bifurcated into First Order and Second Order. In Second Order texts, they assert, there exists a message which is projected through three different levels of meaning projection. Descriptions of characters constitute one of the features used in meaning projection at their third meta-level of interpretation of meaning. The paper discusses the different ways in which characters such as Chu Nwoke, Justice Okpetum, Mrs Edo, Chief Olabisi, Apolonia and Archdeacon Obi were described by the author to project the message of human apostasy in the text, the fact that humans are a combination of good and evil as exhibited in the Nigerian elitist materialism.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.025

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0040.022
Scholarly communication0.0070.015
Open science0.0010.005
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.024
GPT teacher head0.248
Teacher spread0.224 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian social scienceSame topicDiscourse Analysis in Language StudiesFrench-language works237,207