Bibliographic record
Abstract
One of M.M. Bakhtin’s contributions to the study of texts was his profound distrust of formalism. In this essay, I seek to extend this insight to the study of biblical genres. As such, I work to detach the study of biblical genres from form-criticism, and to examine genre as dialogically constructed (and thus socially situated). To do so, I draw on Bakhtin’s work on dialogism, the chronotope, and heteroglossia. However, in his work Bakhtin did not clearly provide the motive or impulse for dialogism. I seek to enhance and refine a dialogic understanding of genre by reconceptualising genre as a site of politics constructed by the operation of power and eros. In this essay, I explore power from a Foucauldian perspective, seeing it as a network of discourse relations that enfolds the struggle for domination. The dynamics of power, once understood, help to understand the development of distinct genres and development within genres. In this essay, I explore eros from the perspective of productive act (Deleuze), as well as from the perspective of desire for the lacked object (Hegel, Lacan, Foucault), both understandings being ultimately Platonic in origin. Without understanding the erotic impulse, I argue that we cannot understand the dynamics of power that explain dialogically-constructed genre. In this way, this essay takes Bakhtin as a starting point and touchstone, but moves into some different areas as well.
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 | 0.004 | 0.009 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.006 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.006 | 0.028 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.012 | 0.009 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".