Bibliographic record
Abstract
At first glance, the names of the localities in Judg 18:12 do not seem to fit the framework of chapter 18. Traditionally, v.12 (in particular 12ba) is therefore labelled as an etiological note which was added later. P. J. van Dijk has made it clear, however, that texts viewed as etiological often do not explain or legitimize any phenomena, but -as rhetorical devices -lend credibility to stories. However, the fact that a place named Mahaneh-dan is unknown to us argues against both the classical-etiological understanding of v.12 and that of van Dijk. A solution to the problem begins with the geographical location and the theological meaning of the city of Kiriath-jearim. Geographically, Kiriath-jearim is in Judah, on the boundary of the Northern Kingdom; theologically the city may be associated with the ark of the covenant, and thereby with the Torah of YHWH. That the Danites are encamped at or beyond of Kiriath-jearim, shows from a Judean perspective that they distance themselves from Judah and the Torah of YHWH. Their way -leading diagonally from the Southwest to the Northeast through the Northern Kingdom, and therefore representing pars pro toto the conduct of life for all of the Northern tribes -is a way of brutal force and uninhibited serving of idols. Because the location of the encampment of the Danites is called Mahaneh-dan, "Dan's Camp", the Danites are characterized as anti-Yahwist desperados. Judg 18:12 is neither a classical etiology nor a rhetorical device, but a metaphorical etiology, i.e. a verse governed by its context in such a way, that it signifies something other than what it appears to signify.
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 | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.008 | 0.022 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.008 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.009 | 0.001 |
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".