Theme of Adore and Nationalism in Tagore’s Gitanjali: A Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Rabindranath Tagore (1861-1941) was a significant contributor to the emerging history of Indian Literature in English. His famous work Gitanjali gave him worldwide recognition. It won him Nobel Prize for Literature in 1913. It was appreciated for its creativity by W. B. Yeats, Ezra Pound and many other European critics. The songs in Gitanjali are the Poet’s meditation on God, Man and Nature. This work Gitanjali expresses his keen sense of observation, his lively curiosity, his humour, and humanity, his Philosophies of love, life and God. Tagore’s Gitanjali has been celebrated as a great poem on the divinity of love. Love lights the inner world of human feelings and sensibilities, and one of the oldest as well as Universal emotions and it is also the most complex and versatile of all emotions. The spirit of love is advocated by religions and celebrated in Literature. Apart from man - woman relationship, love between father and daughter, mother and son, man and God, has been a recurrent subject for Literature. The treatment of love in Indian Literature dates back to Classical Literature. Here, an attempt is made to analyse the theme of love in Tagore’s Gitanjali. “Gitanjali,” or Song Offerings, is a collection of poems translated by the author, Rabindranath Tagore, from the original Bengali. This collection won the Nobel Prize for Tagore in 1913. This volume includes the original introduction by William Butler Yeats that accompanied the 1911 English language version. Gitanjali is a collection of over 100 inspirational poems by India’s greatest poet.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.015 | 0.011 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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.
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".