MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4285729805 · doi:10.5430/wjel.v12n6p129

Cognitive and Intersemiotic Model of the Visual and Verbal Modes in a Screen Adaptation to Literary Texts

2022· article· en· W4285729805 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Nataliia Holubenko

Bibliographic record

VenueWorld Journal of English Language · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicDiscourse Analysis and Cultural Communication
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGestureLinguisticsIntonation (linguistics)NarrativeSemioticsDirect speechMode (computer interface)Character (mathematics)CognitionPerspective (graphical)PsychologyComputer scienceCognitive psychologyPhilosophyArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The aim of the study is to examine screen adaptations from the perspective of cognitive and intersemiotic models of the visual and verbal modes. The purpose of the study is to express the specificity of a screen text which is defined as a combination of three media: speech, image, and music. The scope is to demonstrate the general framework of an intersemiotic translation from a new point of view – like a transliteration. The method of the research refers to semiotic and stylistic analyzes – methods of transformation from one sign system into another from prose works with regard to their cognitive as well as narrative and stylistic features (Zhong, Chen, & Xuan, 2021). Thus, the study analyses such specific relations between the verbal and visual modes in film adaptations of prose literature as a more detailed description of event episodes, events’ temporal structure, presentation of author’s thoughts and characters’ thoughts; their mental activity formulated indirect speech and inner speech that is shown only by the actor’s intonation. The results of the study made possible to show the types of inner speech in their adaptations: author’s thoughts, characters’ thoughts which are presented only by the verbal mode, and visual modes’ inner speeches that combine the modes of character’s voice and image. One can conclude, that taking into account intersemiotic relations between the visual and verbal spaces, it is possible to explain, for instance, how the words of characters are replaced by their facial expressions, gestures, or intonations.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.009
Scholarly communication0.0050.004
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.315
Teacher spread0.294 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueWorld Journal of English LanguageSame topicDiscourse Analysis and Cultural CommunicationFrench-language works237,207