Bibliographic record
Abstract
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.006 | 0.019 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".