The Use of the Concept of “Language Variation” As a Stylistic Device in Pygmalion: Toward A Socio-Stylistic Approach
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this paper, the author supports the claim that there is an inevitable relationship between language and social class to which a speaker (character) belongs. The paper claims that a literary language is a manifestation of the verbal practices done by real speakers in real communicative situations. The paper illustrates that Bernard Shaw in Pygmalion used the concept of “language variation” as a stylistic device to reveal some significant social aspects of Eliza Doolittle, the main character of the play. Drawing on Basil Bernstein’s distinction between elaborated code and restricted code, the paper compares between Eliza as a low -class illiterate speaker and the same Eliza after having intensive linguistic training by Prof. Higgins. The analysis is based on some selected extracts of Eliza’s speech in different conversational scenes in the play. The paper hypothizes that literary discourse, mainly dialogues, can be treated as an ordinary language used in real conversational situations. The analysis was conducted from phonological, syntactic, pragmatic and sociolinguistic perspectives.
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 | 0.009 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.054 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.008 | 0.007 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.007 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| 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".