MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2046261929 · doi:10.5508/jhs.2009.v9.a19

אני ולבי - The Syntactic Encoding of the Collaborative Nature of Qohelet's Experiment

2010· article· en· W2046261929 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Robert D. Holmstedt

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Hebrew Scriptures · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicAncient Near East History
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPronounSubject (documents)LinguisticsSyntaxSubject pronounPersonal pronounFeature (linguistics)NarrativePsychologyPhilosophyComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The language of the book of Qohelet has both intrigued and frustrated generations of scholars due to its abundant orthographic, morphological, syntactic, and lexical peculiarities. One linguistic feature that has not received proper attention, however, is the presence and syntactic position of the first-person subject pronoun אני, e.g., 1:16דברתי אני עם־לבי. The independent subject pronoun is variously described as pleonastic, a strategy for emphasizing the subject, and a strategy for marking an important narrative point. However, none of these descriptions accurately describe its use in the book, and so in this essay I will address the syntax and function of Qohelet's use of the first-person subject pronouns.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.319
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.230
Teacher spread0.220 · 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 designNot applicable
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
Published2010
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Hebrew ScripturesSame topicAncient Near East HistoryFrench-language works237,207