MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2889728672 · doi:10.201411/clri.v5i3.32

The Use of English Language in the Short Stories of Bharati Mukherjee

2018· article· en· W2889728672 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
G Nirmala Siva

Bibliographic record

VenueContemporary Literary Review India (University Grants Commission) · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicLiterary Theory and Cultural Hermeneutics
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEthosFace (sociological concept)Situational ethicsTheme (computing)LinguisticsIndian EnglishLiteratureForeign languageSociologyCreative writingHistoryArtPsychologyComputer sciencePedagogyPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Language plays an important role in the short stories. Different writers have adapted different means to express their ideas in their stories in English. All languages flourish in a particular environment. If any language has to flourish in a foreign land it needs alterations so as to come to terms with the cultural differences of the land. The non-native speakers face so many problems in depicting their thoughts and themes in a non-native language. Particularly when the Indian creative artist has to depict his theme and ethos in English he has to mould and alter the language to suit it to the Indian characters and situations. He cannot totally write like British writers, because the traditional and situational differences come in his way. So the Indian creative writers have invented their own idiom and usage of English language to suit their creative needs. Bharati  Mukherjee   uses English language to suit her American and Canadian settings and situations and to suit her characters Her primary education in missionary schools also has helped her in this regard .In her two volumes of stories she uses pure American English.

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 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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.933
Threshold uncertainty score0.461

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 studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.094
GPT teacher head0.258
Teacher spread0.164 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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

Citations0
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueContemporary Literary Review India (University Grants Commission)Same topicLiterary Theory and Cultural HermeneuticsFrench-language works237,207