Bibliographic record
Abstract
“AUNT MARTHA’S SHEEP” (Taft 1986), “The Badger Drive” (Ashton), “Tickle Cove Pond” (Hiscock); all are songs that, taken from folk tradition in Newfoundland, have become local icons. Among others that have achieved this status is “She’s Like the Swallow.” It appears never to have been widely known and sung in oral tradition. Indeed, since Maud Karpeles first collected it in 1930, only five other texts from four other singers, and three other melodies have been reported by folksong researchers. Like the three other songs mentioned above, it has only been reported from oral tradition in Newfoundland. In spite of this original rarity, today it is well known as an old Canadian folksong of English origins. Its first and still the most important primary printing was in Karpeles’s 1934 songbooks, with R. Vaughan Williams’s setting of the music. Edith Fowke and Richard Johnston reprinted it in their 1954 book Folksongs of Canada, still widely used in schools today. In 1965 Kenneth Peacock published a longer text, set to a very similar melody, in Songs of the Newfoundland Outports. All subsequent popular and art music interpretations of the song can be traced to these key publications. Yet the song as published differs from the song as it was originally documented in oral tradition. This paper traces the research history of the song, examines the historical and intellectual processes that led to the differences between the song as recovered and the song as published, and seeks to answer these questions: What are the meanings of the song, and how did the preservation process alter them? When Karpeles collected “She’s Like the Swallow” in 1930, Newfoundland was a self-governing dominion. By the time of its first publication, Newfoundland had reverted to colonial status, and was being governed by an appointed commission.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.012 | 0.014 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.008 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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".