Affecting change : aspects of rhetoric, poetics and logic in the minor poems of Guido Cavalcanti
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This thesis studies the use of rhetoric, poetics and logic in thirteenth-century Italian poetry, specifically that of Guido Cavalcanti. The poetic production of Cavalcanti is examined as an example of the synthesis of science and poetry, and secondly as an example of the use of persuasive techniques. In particular, I examine his so-called minor poems as examples of the theory of love expressed in "Donna me prega". My work hinges on two aspects: the fact that the central metaphor in the poetry of Cavalcanti represents the phenomenology of love as a passion of the body using medical terminology from Avicenna, and that the radical Aristotelianism (marginalised by the ecclesiastical condemnations) defines Cavalcanti's philosophical and scientific discourse. Cavalcanti combats the opposition of his readership to his radical Aristotelianism with persuasive techniques, rhetorical and poetic, and with logic found in Aristotle, his commentators Gundisalvus, al-Farabi, Avicenna, Averroes, and Roger Bacon.
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 | 0.006 | 0.011 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.006 | 0.038 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".