Bibliographic record
Abstract
ABSTRACT This article considers Milton’s art in relation to modality and the evolving grammar of possibility in Early Modern English. Specifically, it reads the surprisingly complex modal auxiliary verbs, may and its rival can, as keywords in poetic scenes of mental deliberation. A comparative analysis of Shakespearean drama sets the scene, demonstrating how the polysemy of may contributes not only to a psychology of potential action in Brutus’s deliberation over Caesar’s assassination but also to his political conceptions. In Milton’s Sonnet 8, by comparison, the ascendance of ability-can over may affirms the poet’s power and the potential reach of the English language. In the translated epigraph to Areopagitica, genuine liberty finds definition in the interplay of a distinctive English liberty-may with a meritocratic ability can-and-will. Can and will are again lead performers in the deliberative interrogation of divine agency in Paradise Regained, whereas the role of might is questioned in Milton’s tragic depiction of fallen agency in Samson Agonistes.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".