Bachmanns Reflexion über Sprache und Gewalt im Erzählungsband Das dreißigste Jahr
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The focus of this article is Ingeborg Bachmann’s critical and poetic thinking on the relationship between language and violence. The starting point is a commentary of a central passage from the first Frankfurt lecture Fragen und Scheinfragen (Questions and Pseudo-Questions, 1959), in which Bachmann describes the writer's attitude to language. Dissatisfaction with and suspicion of language are part of a writer's crisis and at the same time his/her greatest motivation. Next, Bachmann's collection of stories Das dreißigste Jahr (The Thirtieth Year, 1961) is presented as a critical analysis of human coexistence and of the social use of language. Bachmann observes and describes the emergence and development of violence from which one cannot escape: language and violence appear to be intertwined. The characters in two of the stories (The Thirtieth Year and Everything), who want to escape this violence and language, are analysed through concepts developed by René Girard. According to Girard, the cause of interpersonal conflicts is the “mimetic desire” of people who live in close proximity with one another. Coexistence fosters rivalry, envy, and jealousy. This behaviour is contagious and shared by all members of the group, who repeat it by imitating each other, which leads to rapid escalations of violence.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.011 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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".