Lyrical I in Poetic Discourse of Carl Sandburg: A Linguo-Cognitive Approach
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The article deals with the linguo-cognitive analysis of the expression of the lyrical I in the poetic discourse of the prominent representative of the epoch of American modernism—Carl Sandburg. The lyrical I is understood as a poet’s imagery in which the image of a lyrical hero and the image of the author are united in a syncretic way and which represents a three-fold linguo-cognitive construct that incorporates a conceptual, pragmatic and verbal embodiments. Based on the analysis made in the research, the authors arrived at the conclusion that Carl Sandburg’s lyrical I describes a man of labor, depicts a difficult life of a man in an industrial city, shows the author’s appeal in support of a man’s fighting for his rights, for peace and freedom. In the poetic discourse of Carl Sandburg, the lyrical I is represented with the help of an urban figurativeness, a newspaper style of the language, a perfect skill of use of a blank verse resembling a song folklore, and a wide use of local expressions and dialectal words, colloquial language and prosaisms.
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 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.008 | 0.030 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.010 | 0.007 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| 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".