MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2020421887 · doi:10.5539/ass.v11n8p225

Stage Direction Role in M. I. Tsvetaeva’s Romantic Plays: Semantic, Functional and Pragmatic Aspects

2015· article· en· W2020421887 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueAsian Social Science · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicDiscourse Analysis and Cultural Communication
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPolysemyRomanceLinguisticsStage (stratigraphy)Representation (politics)Relevance (law)ParatextFunction (biology)GricePhilosophyPsychologyGeologyPragmaticsPsychoanalysisPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A stage direction as a special kind of paratext gets a special refraction in the plays by Marina Tsvetaeva: it is a kind of the author’s mise en scène direction. The article focuses on semantic, pragmatic and functional analysis of stage directions in the romantic plays “Blizzard” (“Metel”) and “Jack of Hearts” (“Chervonniy Valet”) by Marina Tsvetaeva. The authors draw particular attention to examining the pragmatic function of inter-connective, prepositional and inter-positional remarks in the analyzed plays. The topic relevance is related to the consideration of the discourse of the great poet, who plays a special place in the cultural heritage, both in Russia and abroad, as well as of polysemy and duality of stage direction representation in the romantic paradigm of M. I. Tsvetaeva’s plays.

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.

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)0.002
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: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.745
Threshold uncertainty score0.779

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
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 head0.031
GPT teacher head0.318
Teacher spread0.287 · 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