The Inglis language and the emergence of the Lowland Scotland literary tradition
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The paper studies the social history of the idiom spoken by the indigenous population of Lowland Scotland and the Borders of the late 12th – third quarter of the 14th centuries, as well as the first written poetic monuments of Early Middle Scots (Inglis). The aim of this study is to consider the factors that contributed to the spread of the Inglis language, giving a description of its ethnic and social base, the areas of use and the study of the first important poetic monuments written in this language, preceding the epic poem “Bruce” (1375) by J. Barbour, associated by most scholars with the emergence of the literary tradition of the Lowland Scotland regional language. The article gives a brief overview of the literary heritage of Thomas the Rhymer, the poetic work “Song on the Death of Alexander III”, as well as other written monuments of the Scottish pre-literary period. We describe the history of the creation of the “Auchinleck Manuscript”, which includes texts written in various dialects of Middle English, and points out the special scientific value of the Manuscript. As a result of the research, we have come to the conclusion that the isolation of the Scots language and the emergence of its own literary tradition was caused by both external factors, related to the independence of the Scottish state, and internal ones, related to the growth of the Inglis idiom prestige on the territory of Lowland Scotland during the period in question of the Scots language history.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.006 | 0.008 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".