Mythopoetic and Realistic Image of the Native Land in the Works of Modern Writers
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The article explores the specifics of the embodiment of the image of the native land in the works of modern writers. After the years of Soviet power, when a person was evaluated as a cog, nature as a source of resources, society overestimates the value system. Quite well-known works appear condemning the rejection of man as a person, works of an ecological nature. In this article, a rethinking of attitude to nature, to the native land is considered through the prism of a number of works by venerable writers about the native land, more often - about the native village. Distinctive features of the perception of the native land in these works is the personally significant perception of the homeland, its understanding as part of itself, its past, present and future, in contrast to Soviet literature, in which the narrator was aimed at perceiving the homeland in the present and illusory beautiful future. Sources are the stories of M. Galiev, G. Gilmanov, M. Vali-Bardzhily. The creativity of each of these authors was considered to varying degrees by scientists from the point of view of aesthetic value, poetics, and problems. However, the native land was considered more as a subject of works, rather than an independent image, which is an indicator of the life values and philosophy of writers. In this article, using the works of these writers as an example, the depth of the image of the native land is shown, understanding it not only as nature or the place where you were born, but as a source of strength.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.018 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| 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".