Formula and “Fixity” in South Slavic Oral Epics: A defense of South Slavic poetic verse against literary accusations of mechanicalism
Bibliographic record
Abstract
As the South Slavic oral epic originated in a primary oral culture – a culture that is unaffected by literacy – and as it is composed through repertorial formulas and themes, it may find itself subject to misunderstanding by literary minds, particularly through accusations of mechanical composition. This paper aims to argue that an idea of “fixity,” with regards to the South Slavic oral epic’s formulas and themes, is flawed when one considers the culture from whence it came. I examine the necessity of formulaic repetition in the South Slavic oral culture of the 1930s-1950s, arguing that, without literacy and the possibility of record making, repetition was the only method through which their history and culture could be preserved.
 Drawing from Albert Lord’s study of the South Slavic oral epic, this paper establishes that while still existing in a primary oral culture, South Slavic poets interiorize formulas and themes until they are synonymous with reflexive speech. In order to demonstrate this, this paper explores the way in which a South Slavic boy learns to perform. I examine John Miles Foley’s delineation of the South Slavic decameter, which the South Slavic boy must learn as the foundation of all future lines of verse. I also demonstrate the efficiency of this foundation by studying substitution systems in epic verse; the mastery of substitution results in an instantaneous composition of song that is only possible through the interiorization of its elements.
 This paper then considers the term homeostasis, which in the case of this verse, refers to the obsolescence of irrelevant cultural matter. Using a case study, I analyze a singer’s substitution of obsolete themes and formulas with ones of then-contemporary relevance, arguing that the formulas easily adapt to change. The South Slavic oral epic is thus not mechanical, but a naturalized art form.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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 teacher head, 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".