MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2053519675 · doi:10.1111/1467-968x.12025

J. Matlock's <i>Young ladies guide to the knowledge of the English tongue</i> (1715): contextualising the first grammar of English for ladies

2013· article· en· W2053519675 on OpenAlexaff
Carol Percy

Bibliographic record

VenueTransactions of the Philological Society · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicHistorical Linguistics and Language Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsVernacularGrammarLinguisticsSpellingResidenceLiteracyLexisHistorySociologyPhilosophyPedagogy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Recently rediscovered, The Young Ladies Guide to the Knowledge of the English Tongue (1715) is now the earliest known grammar of English for females. After considering its possible authorship by the writing master John Matlock, I use his residence of Lichfield to exemplify the various ways in which girls might acquire vernacular literacy. Drawing on the Eighteenth‐Century English Grammars database (ECEG), I compare the Guide with contemporary grammars and spelling books, linking its latinate lexis, ‘ungrammatical’ sentences and non‐traditional grammatical terms and categories to an audience of Ladies who are stereotypically not classically educated but nonetheless distinct from charity school girls. I also contextualise this text in such ongoing changes as the movement from classical to vernacular grammar, the role of periodicals in commodifying vernacular education and debates about women's education.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.054
Threshold uncertainty score0.106

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0070.007
Scholarly communication0.0050.002
Open science0.0000.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.000

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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.240
Teacher spread0.216 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
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

Citations3
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTransactions of the Philological SocietySame topicHistorical Linguistics and Language StudiesFrench-language works237,207