MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1981815515 · doi:10.1177/000842980703600101

Of myth and mantra: The slippery taxonomy of printed and oral Vrat Kathas

2007· article· en· W1981815515 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Robert J. Menzies

Bibliographic record

VenueStudies in Religion/Sciences Religieuses · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicRhetoric and Communication Studies
Canadian institutionsConcordia University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMantraMythologyHinduismNarrativeAestheticsPresentation (obstetrics)LiteratureHistoryPhilosophyLinguisticsArtMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper examines how printed vrat kathas (stories associated with Hindu women's domestic rituals) present categories of myth, mantra and their internal "oral logic." The paper will articulate three things: (1) that vrat kathas deserve to be included in the more elevated category of "myth" because of the way they function within the Hindu women's ritual structure and world-view; (2) these stories are modeled on an understanding of mantra as a speech act; and (3) even when printed, these stories maintain an "oral logic" in structure, presentation of narrative and intention. Thus, printed pamphlets can also qualify, ironically, as "speech" acts. All of this indicates the difficulty inherent in creating a water-tight taxonomy of genres and suggests that a more appropriate understanding is as localities on a continuum.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.822
Threshold uncertainty score0.998

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.005
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 head0.158
GPT teacher head0.347
Teacher spread0.189 · 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.

Study designTheoretical or conceptual
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
Published2007
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueStudies in Religion/Sciences ReligieusesSame topicRhetoric and Communication StudiesFrench-language works237,207