Theatrical and Self-Conscious Metaphor in Modern Realism: Ernest Hemingway and Morley Callaghan Reunited
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Cet essai en deux parties considère l’utilisation de métaphores conscientes et théâtrales comme des « revendications de vérité » acceptables pour des réalistes modernes tels que l’écrivain américain Ernest Hemingway et son ami et collègue canadien Morley Callaghan. Il rappelle les distinctions conceptuelles récentes en linguistique ainsi que les questions morales de la philosophie du langage au milieu du siècle dernier en lien avec le réalisme. Cette combinaison permet d’expliquer comment le type spécifique de métaphore utilisé dans les textes brefs étudiés ici introduit un compromis éthique entre vérité et mensonge. Pourquoi certains écrivains se préoccupent-ils de la métaphore ? Quelles attitudes à l’égard de la vérité influent sur leur utilisation de la métaphore ? De quelles mesures écrivent-ils métaphoriquement et honnêtement ? « The Capital of the World » d’Hemingway (1936) et « A Predicament » de Callaghan (1929) contiennent des métaphores dont les dimensions performatives atténuent les préoccupations des réalistes quant à la fausseté de la métaphore.
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 | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.026 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.007 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".