The Oneida Creation Story, and: Finding the Center: The Art of the Zuni Storyteller, and: American Indians: Folk Tales and Legends, and: Native American Legends of the Great Lakes and the Mississippi Valley (review)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
These four works include two extremely important contributions to Native American tales as folk literature. The late Floyd Lounsbury and an able student, Bryan Gick, rescued and now have put into print, in Oneida and English, a version of the "Oneida Creation Story" as told by two of the last fluent speakers of that language. While working in Ontario in 1971, Lounsbury tape-recorded a recitation of this tale by the 96-year-old Demus Elm. Since that tape was made, "a large segment of the beginning of the tape was lost" (p. 2). Fortunately Gick was able to recover the lost segments from Harvey Antone, "one of the last few fluent speakers of Oneida" (p. 3) who also knew this story. This major study of a specific and essential Oneida text, including numerous aspects of linguistic analysis, includes references to the forty earlier translated versions of various Iroquoian creation stories (see Thomas S. Alber, "Dendrogram and Celestial Tree: Numerical Taxonomy and Variants of the Iroquoian Creation Myth," Canadian Journal of Native Studies 7:195-221, 1987). Lounsbury and Gick contribute to this published corpus with this narration and also include an appendix that includes two previously unpublished versions of the story. Both of these shorter versions had been written in English. Also, note that Katharine Judson was the transcriber of the earlier of these two accounts (see below). Judson's middle initial is incorrectly listed, but that is the only error that I noted in this splendid and important volume.
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 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".