MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2750243434 · doi:10.1515/cog-2016-0098

Mediated characters: Multimodal viewpoint construction in comics

2017· article· en· W2750243434 on OpenAlexaff
Mike Borkent

Bibliographic record

VenueCognitive Linguistics · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicLanguage, Metaphor, and Cognition
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsModalitiesComicsNarrativeStorytellingCognitionPerspective (graphical)ViewpointsConstrual level theoryContext (archaeology)Character (mathematics)Cognitive linguisticsSuperordinate goalsOptimal distinctiveness theoryCognitive scienceComputer scienceMultimodalityInterpretation (philosophy)LinguisticsSociologyPsychologyArtificial intelligenceArtSocial psychologyVisual artsMathematicsHistoryPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract I analyze multimodal viewpoint construction in comics to engage with how modalities function within the medium as a specific discourse context with distinct conventions and material qualities. I show how comics employ established storytelling practices with character, narrator, and narrative viewpoint levels, while building up and interweaving these through strategic uses of the modalities of the medium. I mobilize the cognitive theories of embodiment, domains, mental simulation, and mental space blending as an analytical framework. I examine the asynchronicity of viewpoint elements between modalities and their synthesis into composite character viewpoints in several examples. I show how modalities can be prioritized and their different qualities and functions strategically manipulated for viewpoint construal. These brief examples show the complexity inherent in multimodal communication and interpretation and the usefulness of encouraging the medium-specific and interdisciplinary analyses of cultural works from a cognitive linguistic perspective.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.022

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0030.010
Scholarly communication0.0070.005
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.000

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 head0.034
GPT teacher head0.334
Teacher spread0.301 · 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; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
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

Citations30
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCognitive LinguisticsSame topicLanguage, Metaphor, and CognitionFrench-language works237,207