MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W242117705 · doi:10.1353/srm.2011.0034

Wordsworth’s Epitaphic Poetics and the Print Market

2011· article· en· W242117705 on OpenAlex

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.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueStudies in Romanticism · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicPhilippine History and Culture
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPoeticsRomanticismRhetoricRomanceArt historyPoetryEnlightenmentArtLiteratureHistoryPhilosophyTheology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Wordsworth’s Epitaphic Poetics and the Print Market Scott Hess (bio) Scott Hess Earlham College Scott Hess Scott Hess is Associate Professor of English at Earlham College, in Richmond, Indiana. His book. Authoring the Self: Self-Representation, Authorship, and the Print Market in British Poetry from Pope through Wordsworth, was published by Routledge in 2005, and his next book, William Wordsworth and the Ecology of Authorship: Nature, Class, Aesthetics, and the Roots of Environmentalism in Nineteenth-Century Culture, will be published by University of Virginia Press in Spring, 2012. Footnotes 1. Douglas Kneale, Monumental Writing: Aspects of Rhetoric in Wordsworth’s Writing (Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press, 1988), xviii. See also Paul de Man, The Rhetoric of Romanticism (New York: Columbia University Press, 1984), esp. chap. 4; Frances Ferguson, Wordsworth: Language as Counter-Spirit (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1977); and Mary Jacobus, Romanticism, Writing, and Sexual Difference (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1989), esp. chaps. 1 and 10. 2. Kurt Fosso, Buried Communities: Wordsworth and the Bonds of Mourning (Albany: State SiR, 50 (Spring 2011) University of New York Press, 2004); Michele Turner Sharp, “The Churchyard Among the Wordsworthian Mountains: Mapping the Common Ground of Death and the Reconfiguration of Romantic Community,” ELH 62, no. 2 (1995): 387–407; Esther Schor, Bearing the Dead: The British Culture of Mourning from the Enlightenment to Victoria (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1994); and Lorna Clymer, “Graved in Tropes: The Figural Logic of Epitaphs and Elegies in Blair, Gray, Cowper, Wordsworth,” ELH 62, no. 2 (1995): 347–87. 3. Fosso, 7. 4. William St. Clair, The Reading Nation in the Romantic Period (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2004), 11. 5. Jon Klancher, The Making of English Reading Audiences, 1790–1832 (Madison: University of Wisconsin Press, 1987), 172. 6. Classical tombs were traditionally located along the roads leading out of towns, hence the address to the “traveler” to stop and read. For Wordsworth’s discussion of this trope, see The Prose Works of William Wordsworth, ed. W. J. B. Owen and J. W. Smyser (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1974), 2:54. Subsequent citations of Wordsworth’s prose writing are by volume and page number from this edition. Geoffrey Hartman, “Wordsworth, Inscriptions, and Romantic Nature Poetry,” in From Sensibility to Romanticism, ed. Frederick W. Hill and Harold Bloom (New York: Humanities Press, 1982), 389–413. 7. Joshua Scodel, The English Poetic Epitaph: Commemoration and Conflict from Johnson to Wordsworth (Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 1991). 8. On this development, see Ernest Bernhardt-Kabisch, “The Epitaph and the Romantic Poets: a Survey,” Huntington Library Quarterly 30, no. 2 (1967): 141. 9. For some versions of how poets responded to this new mass public and wrote the processes of reception and audience formation into their texts, see Klancher, Making of English Reading Audiences; Charles Rzepka, The Self as Mind: Vision and Identity in Wordsworth, Coleridge, and Keats (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1986); and Lucy Newlyn, Reading, Writing, and Romanticism: the Anxieties of Reception (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2000). For a broad account of this new situation that poets faced and how they responded with changing forms of self-representations, see also my book, Authoring the Self: Print Culture, Poetry, and Self-Representation from Pope Through Wordsworth (New York: Routledge, 2005). 10. For the two Chiabera translations, see William Wordsworth: the Poems, ed. John O. Hayden (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1977) 1:831, 833. 11. Quoted from Poems, in Two Volumes, and Other Poems, 1800–1807, ed. Jared Curtis (Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 1983), lines 1, 4. 12. For a general discussion of the poetics of the “Essays Upon Epitaphs,” see W. J. B. Owen, Wordsworth as Critic (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1969), chap. 6. 13. Newlyn, 125. 14. On English nationalism and its self-definition through sincerity, in opposition to France and French Enlightenment culture, see Gerald Newman, The Rise of English Nationalism (New York: St. Martin’s Press, 1987), esp. 117–18, 127–28. 15. See Bernhardt-Kabisch, “The Epitaph and the Romantic Poets,” as well as “Wordsworth: the Monumental Poet,” Philological Quarterly 44, no 4 (1965): 505; and Schor, Bearing the Dead, 55–56. 16. On the rise of this domestic tourism, see Ian...

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 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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.547
Threshold uncertainty score0.742

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 studies0.0010.002
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 head0.096
GPT teacher head0.332
Teacher spread0.236 · 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