Emotional Sound Symbolism and the Volta in Shakespearean and Petrarchan Sonnets
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Sonnets written in the Shakespearean or Petrarchan form are both assumed to present and then answer a problem, but they do so in different ways. The two forms have different rhyming schemes. The volta or turn is predicted to occur between lines 12 and 13 in the first and lines 8 and 9 in the second form. It is argued that sound in poetry is emotionally communicative (symbolic), especially when the predominance of Harsh (e.g., t, r) over Gentle (e.g., l, m) sounds is considered. An analysis of the sounds (phonemes) in various exemplars of the two forms (N=285 sonnets) was undertaken. Shakespeare’s sonnets represented his form and those of a variety of authors represented the Petrarchan form. Predominant Harshness was the dependent variable in a design which compared line and form. There were significant effects associated with line, form, and their interaction (p<.05). Shakespeare’s sonnets, had a lower predominant Harshness than the Petrarchan sonnets. Both Shakespearean and Petrarchan sonnets exhibited a major drop in predominant Harshness (a volta) between lines 8 and 9. Both began on a gentle note, increased in predominant Harshness as problems were being expounded, and returned to a gentler note for their endings. Only Shakespearean sonnets had a spike in harshness in the third quatrain, suggesting that the author was still unfolding problems rather than resolving them there.
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 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".