MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

REFLECTION OF PROTAGONIST’S WORLDVIEW IN A CONTEMPORARY ARABIC NOVEL A CASE STUDY OF LATIN QUARTER (AL-HAYY AL-LATINI)

2018· article· en· W2891345879 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Houman Nazemian, Abdollah Hosseini

Bibliographic record

VenuePEOPLE International Journal of Social Sciences · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicHistorical and Linguistic Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsQuarter (Canadian coin)ArabicReflection (computer programming)ArtHistoryLiteraturePhilosophyArchaeologyLinguisticsComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Latin Quarter is one of the famous novels of Suhail Idris, the well-known Lebanese novelist, short story writer, journalist and translator (1925-2008). This novel published in 1954, during a critical period in the middle east and in particular the Arab world. The confrontation between East and West is among the issues that have been reflected in many Arab novels during the 20th century. It is, in fact, part of a series of cultural and social problems in the Third world. In this paper, we have made an effort to elucidate the writer’s worldview in this novel. As such, his perspective on the Western and Eastern worlds, especially the conflicts between these two worlds, his idea of Paris, the alteration of his view about the world after making contact with the West, the cultural differences between the west and the east, and finally, the eastern protagonist’s excessive admiration for the west is explored in Latin quarter. Our methodology is Sociocriticism based on the Lucien Goldman's point of view. The results indicate the protagonist’s return to his native culture and city after all his adulations for the west. It seems that this novel reflects the author's experiences, and it is an invitation to Eastern youth to return to their homeland instead of emigration to the west and try to build their own countries and abide by their native traditions.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.112
Threshold uncertainty score0.992

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.163
GPT teacher head0.441
Teacher spread0.278 · 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 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

Citations0
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePEOPLE International Journal of Social SciencesSame topicHistorical and Linguistic StudiesFrench-language works237,207