MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1637659242

Influence of The Bible Upon English Words

2013· article· en· W1637659242 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Qiang Kang

Bibliographic record

VenueStudies in literature and language · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicLexicography and Language Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsKey (lock)LiteratureLinguisticsEnglish languageWestern cultureHistoryPsychologySociologyArtPhilosophyComputer science
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Holy Bible, which has been included on the list of World Cultural Heritages, is the source of western culture, has had a profound influence on all aspects of the social life of the western countries. A large number of English words and allusions are from The Bible , and these words and allusions is a key to understanding and studying western languages and culture. Therefore, discussing the profound influence of The Bible upon English words at this level is of great significance. This paper begins with the English words sourced from The Bible , and then probes into the influences upon the English language. This thesis can increase the readers’ Bible knowledge, eliminate the cultural barrier in trans-cultural communication and make readers understand and use English language to make trans-cultural communication better. Through this thesis, we can view the Holy Bible’s great influence in the Western countries from another angle, and we also can get a new field and a new way of viewing and analyzing the Holy Bible. Meanwhile, this thesis is helpful for us to analyze and study English language. Especially, it is greatly helpful to study the developing process and features of English language, and the origin of English words.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.015
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · 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
Metaresearch0.0030.015
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0030.007
Scholarly communication0.0040.003
Open science0.0000.003
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.001

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.243
Teacher spread0.233 · 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 designNot applicable
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
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueStudies in literature and languageSame topicLexicography and Language StudiesFrench-language works237,207