MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2202271044

중국 명대 여성작가의 문학체험과 글쓰기

2012· article· ko· W2202271044 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
정민경

Bibliographic record

VenueTrans-Humanities · 2012
Typearticle
Languageko
FieldComputer Science
TopicEducational Systems and Policies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHistory of literatureChinaSilenceHistoryLiteratureStyle (visual arts)Literary criticismLiterary magazineLiterary scienceChinese literatureWriting styleSociologyArtAesthetics
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Women in China have traditionally been considered to have suffered in silence under an ethic that was suffocating to them. However, a lot of literary works written by women were published in collections as printing technology developed in the Ming Dynasty and women writers as a group, not just as individuals, appeared. This phenomenon can give rise to a new trend in the history of Chinese literary studies, which has previously centered upon male writers, but the study of female Chinese writers is still few. This study therefore examines women’s literary activities and their literary philosophy through what the women writers directly wrote. First of all, I attempt to arrange prefaces and letters written by women in the collection of literary works Women’s Works in Recent History(歷代婦女著作考) and Collection of Letters Written by Women in History (歷代名媛文苑簡便), written by Ho Moon-gye, and The McGill-Harvard-Yenching Library’s Ming-Qing Women’s Writings(明淸婦女著作) and examine the characteristics of female literary style in them, dividing these into three large parts. The first is female education and female writing. Comparatively many books were published due to the development of the printing industry in the Ming Dynasty, and the opportunity for education was expanded to women connected to education. Women read various books and wrote their works based on the knowledge gleaned. Second, I treatliterary exchange and literary recognition through private groups. Women in the Ming Dynasty exchanged literature with each other and raised their literary knowledge through their favorite groups, wrote about their daily lives in their works, and continued to form bonds of empathy while reading theirworks together. Third, I note the individual and insignificant writing. Women in the Ming Dynasty were very enthusiastic for literary writing that expressed their own experiences and emotions. Women could encounter their own inner life through individual works describing their busy daily life and exchange their emotions with other women. In this way, female literary activities acted as a means of spreading the thoughts and desires of the heart and women’s views on literature, which are revealed directly and candidly in their prefaces and letters.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.932
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.069
GPT teacher head0.280
Teacher spread0.211 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

Study designNot applicable
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
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTrans-HumanitiesSame topicEducational Systems and PoliciesFrench-language works237,207