Bibliographic record
Abstract
Sherwood Anderson is a significant writer in the history of American literature. “Ohio, Winsburg” is one of his representative works in which metaphors are adopted to play an important part in revealing the themes. This paper attempts to analyze the metaphors in the short stories and find out how the metaphors help to develop the plots and reveal the themes. Key words: Sherwood Anderson, “Ohio, Winsburg”, metaphors, theme—revealing Resume Les personnages feminins n’occupent qu’une petite place dans l’oeuvre de John Steinbeck. Poutant, cet article s’efforce d’etudier, par l’analyse des figures feminines dans Des souris et des hommes et Chrysantheme, la faiblesse et la solitude au fond de l’âme des femmes, qui se situent dans une position defavorable et n’arrivent pas a se liberer des restrictions, dans la lutte contre les hommmes et le processus de la poursuite de leurs reves qui s’aneantissent en face du pouvoir absolu des hommes. Mots cles: les femmes, les reves, les restrictions, la solitude 摘 要 舍伍德•安德森是美國現代文學史上一位不可忽視的小說家。《小城畸人》是他的短篇小說集之一，也是他昀成功的代表作。隱喻是其文學作品中常見的一種表現手法，也越來越多的受到研究者們的關注。本文通過對安德森《小城畸人》文本的分析解讀，找出其中隱喻的存在和表現，試證明隱喻的使用能夠直接而有效地推動小說情節的發展和小說主題的深化與昇華，起到構建主題的作用。 關鍵詞：舍伍德 •安德森；《小城畸人》；隱喻；主題建構
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 | 0.000 | 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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".