Assimilation and Indeterminacy: <i>Moral Tales for Young People, Belinda</i>, and Edgeworth’s Destabilizing Fictions of Maturity
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Maria Edgeworth’s Belinda (1801) assimilates the philosophies and formal structures of the novel and the moral tale in order to de stabilize the representations of femininity in both forms. Scholars argue that the eponymous heroine models a form of rational, domestic femininity and functions as the work’s moral centre. By examining Belinda’s use of two competing narrative forms, this article finds that Edgeworth debunks the feminine models epitopemized in sentimental novels and didactic fiction by showing the flaws in both philosophies. This viewpoint reveals Belinda not as the novel’s moral centre but as a young woman experimenting with different modes of conduct (troped through narrative form) in order to find her own identity. This essay also reveals a connection between Belinda and Moral Tales for Young People (1801), Edgeworth’s first collection of adolescent novellas, and argues that Edgeworth’s novels should be studied in relation to her children’s fiction and educational manuals.
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 | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.009 | 0.022 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 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".