MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Fedor Sologub in English-Language Anthologies: 1915-1950

2022· article· en· W4283833079 on OpenAlex

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.

fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueRUDN Journal of Studies in Literature and Journalism · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicDiscourse Analysis and Cultural Communication
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersHarvard UniversityYork UniversityUniversity of Wisconsin-MadisonYale University
KeywordsPeriod (music)PoetryLiteratureHistoryEnglish languageArtRussian literatureLinguisticsPhilosophyAesthetics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The history of the reception of the Russian Symbolist movement in English begins in the 1890s. Readers in Great Britain and the United States could read about the Russian Symbolist Fedor Sologub long before any of his works were translated into English. During World War I and a parallel wave of interest in Russia, Sologub is one of the most popular Russian writers in the English-speaking world. Some of his poetry and prose works are translated into English and during the years 1915-1950 are included in no fewer than 28 Englishlanguage anthologies. During the first years of this period, almost all of his prose that is accessible to English readers is selected and translated by two translators, John Cournos and Stephen Graham. His poetry, on the other hand, is selected and translated by several translators over the course of this entire period. Anthologies with works by Sologub appear in two main waves: from 1915 until the middle of the 1920s, and in the 1940s after the outbreak of WWII. These anthologies demonstrate how Sologub was presented to English-speaking audiences during these years. This article examines English-language anthologies from this period, comparing what, if anything, is said about Sologub in their introductions to the works by Sologub they include. Some presented him as the quintessential decadent, while others tried to show the various sides of Sologub’s works. It is often the case in anthologies that the opinions of Sologub presented by editors are not supported by the works by Sologub these same editors selected for inclusion. The article ends with three bibliographical appendices listing Sologub’s anthologized poetry and prose and the anthologies that included them.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.182
Threshold uncertainty score0.484

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.039
GPT teacher head0.390
Teacher spread0.351 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it