“NICE” GRAMMARIANS: MAKING DISTINCTIONS OF CLASS, CHARACTER AND GENDER IN WOMEN'S FICTION, 1750–1830
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
For one of its reviewers, The Accidence; or First Rudiments of English Grammar. Designed for the Use of Young Ladies [ … ] By a Lady (1775) epitomized contemporary developments in both women's writing and vernacular grammar. In this article, the author summarizes the imaginative impact of this growing interest in English grammar by surveying the fiction published by women (1750–1830) that is available through Literature Online. Both grammar and fiction have general connections with the socio-economic uncertainty that was stereotypical of the long eighteenth century. Normative grammar rules complemented socio-economic mobility (whether upward or downward), since language conventionally signals its user's social place. Fiction typically focused on the unmarried girl, a figure of intense social liminality. For women novelists (and others), grammar was a polysemous word and a complex concept, especially once it could refer to the vernacular as well as to Latin. In this article, the author demonstrates that (at least for well-educated girls) grammar was much more than an instrument of social discrimination. As a central element of polite education, grammar could represent the interactions of culture on nature, producing the categories of disciplined character and even gender—for girls and for boys, grammar was what distinguished, and thus separated, the sexes. But the representation of lovers' shared grammatical practice not only resolved courtship plots, but could also question social divisions and conventions. Indeed, grammar involves both women's and fiction's concerns—the interplay of culture and nature in individual development, and thus the difficulty and the importance of making distinctions.
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.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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 it