Syntactic Deconstruction of Beckett’s Dramatic Text: A Transitivity Analysis of Waiting for Godot
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study examines the dominant elements of Transitivity (Ideational meaning) of Samuel Beckett’s Waiting for Godot. The analysis of data was conducted by using computational tool, UAM Corpus Tool (UAMTC). The study has found that Beckett’s dramatic text has a considerable amount of Material processes going on in the world of the play but these processes are less directed to a Goal and are even agentless too. The processes are also not spatially and temporally situated. The characters are out of time in Waiting for Godot (Esslin, 1980). The text is a linguistic paradox; lexically simple but structurally complex. The fragmented syntax of the play corresponds with the chaotic existence of man. The meaninglessness of human life has been conveyed through broken language. It is due to these qualities that the play is able to make a mark on the minds of its readers. The present study has explored of the possibility of reconciliation between literary and linguistic approach to the study of literary texts in general and modern drama in particular.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.010 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it