MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1941124143 · doi:10.1177/030908920002508802

Vision and Voice in Isaiah

2000· article· en· W1941124143 on OpenAlexaff
Francis Landy

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal for the Study of the Old Testament · 2000
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicBiblical Studies and Interpretation
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMetaphorPhilosophyContext (archaeology)LiteratureSchema (genetic algorithms)PoetryEpistemologyMeaning (existential)AestheticsLinguisticsHistoryArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This essay consists of four sections, interwoven with a dilatory commentary on the first few verses of Isaiah. They are concerned with the metaphors of vision and voice in Isaiah, as they relate to the problem of metaphoricity in general, and the ever-presence of death in the book. Vision and voice are metaphors for each other, and opposed terms. If vision suggests clarity and exteriority, voice evokes the interiority of the person, and an intimation beyond the horizon. Both terms are contradicted, and paradoxically enriched, by the injunction not to see or hear in Isaiah, and its transmutations through the book. What is seen and heard is a language, which perhaps is not understood or realized, and which is in any case impossibly difficult. The third section turns to the problem of metaphor in the book; it adduces the theories of Jakobson and Kristeva, and proposes that metaphor may be an instrument of disintegration in the book, of the dissolution and disillusion of the poetic world. The last section treats the encompassing schema of death, as announced in the superscription, in the context of the initial metaphor of filiation. It concludes with the ethical problem of the prophet, and critic, in producing and encountering this text.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.767
Threshold uncertainty score0.378

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.030
GPT teacher head0.282
Teacher spread0.252 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations20
Published2000
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal for the Study of the Old TestamentSame topicBiblical Studies and InterpretationFrench-language works237,207