MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2185202796 · doi:10.3968/7760

The Influence of Chinese Culture on Cleanth Brooks

2015· article· en· W2185202796 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
FU Fei-liang

Bibliographic record

VenueStudies in literature and language · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicPoetry Analysis and Criticism
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTaoismSentimentalityIronyPoetryRomanticismAffectionLiteratureChinese culturePhilosophyDoctrineRationalityModerationEnthusiasmSarcasmClassical Chinese poetryAestheticsHistoryPsychologyBuddhismChinaEpistemologyArtSocial psychologyTheology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Cleanth Brooks, one of the American New Critics, was probably influenced by Chinese culture in the following three ways. Firstly, under the big environment of Europe and US which were influenced by Taoism broadly at that time, Brooks was affected and his Paradox Theory was stamped with the beliefs of Taoism. Secondly, with the influence of I. A. Richards et al., who learned a lot from Chinese Confucianism, Brooks was affected by the doctrine of mean and his attitude of moderation and tolerance can be seen in his irony, his poem organism theory, his treatment of a serious of literature issues such as the relationship among text, author and reader, relationship between text and history, and his attitude on the affection and reasoning, etc.. Thirdly, for other famous writers like Pound, Eliot et al., who learned from those images used in Chinese classical poetry and spread images ideas, Brooks got influence from their images application, advocating objective and rationality, against the sentimentality of Romanticism.

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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.403
Threshold uncertainty score0.176

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 studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.306
Teacher spread0.286 · 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.

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

Citations0
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueStudies in literature and languageSame topicPoetry Analysis and CriticismFrench-language works237,207