The Concept of Women-Beating in (Q 4:34): A Textual and Contextual Analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
<p>This paper is concerned with the textual and contextual analysis of wife-discipline in particular in (Q 4:34) and the concept of women-beating in the Qurʾānic discourse in general. The study makes a special reference to two translations of the Qurʾān, namely: Abdel Haleem’s The Qurʾān: A New Translation (2004); and George Sale's The Qurʾān (1734). This account investigates a psycholinguistic analysis of the meaning of ‘beating’ in the entire scripture, in general, and in (Q 4:34), in particular. To achieve this, an in-depth textual and contextual surgery is performed to uncover new psycholinguistic perspectives. The study reports on attitudes of a sample of 163 Saudi women towards violence against women in KSA. Four constructs will be investigated, namely: 1) social aspects of violence against women; 2) socio-economic status⁄ educational aspects of violence against women; 3) preventive indicators of violence against women and; physical aspects of violence against women. It also highlights the claim of Halliday and Hasan (1976:9) that cohesive ties are the only source of texture. This account runs counter to that claim.</p>
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
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 teacher head, 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".