MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2133690092 · doi:10.5430/wjel.v3n1p1

Strategic Politeness in Montgomery's Anne of Green Gables

2013· article· en· W2133690092 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Nawal Fadhil Abbas

Bibliographic record

VenueWorld Journal of English Language · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicLanguage, Discourse, Communication Strategies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPolitenessFace (sociological concept)Meaning (existential)Relation (database)Identity (music)SociologyLinguisticsPoliteness theoryCharacter (mathematics)Value (mathematics)CurriculumPsychologyEpistemologySocial psychologyAestheticsPedagogyPhilosophyComputer scienceMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Linguistic politeness has been shown, over the last few decades, to be a successful device for studying literaturelinguistically. In addition to establishing and asserting identity and achieving goals, linguistic politeness is a meansof studying social interaction to establish social, harmonious and friendly relationships among interactants. Thisstudy aims at investigating Anne's social interaction in Montgomery's Anne of Green Gables, which has a verypowerful meaning in children's literature, and her relation with others as she grows up and as she develops frombeing a socially marginalized female character to a productive contributing citizen of Avonlea. Brown andLevinson's pragmatic theory of politeness (1987), in addition to some other subsequent contributions, provide theanalytical tools to guide this approach, which correspondingly analyses the range of face-threatening acts performed(represented via directives), the forms of redressive actions taken to counter those threats represented in the form oflinguistic strategies and the reasons and goals that substantiate the use of such forms in relation to social roles. Thevalue of the study can be estimated not only by those working within the branches of linguistics or literature, but alsoit can be of value to EFL/ESL learners especially those who study the novel as part of their curriculum.

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: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.393
Threshold uncertainty score0.997

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.261
Teacher spread0.234 · 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 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

Citations1
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueWorld Journal of English LanguageSame topicLanguage, Discourse, Communication StrategiesFrench-language works237,207