Bibliographic record
Abstract
Данное исследование является откликом на статью китайского музыковеда Цянь Ренькана (1914-2013) в журнале «Искусство музыки» № 2, 1986 г. «Двести лет заблуждений: «китайские мелодии» Вебера и Хиндемита». Еe цель состоит в попытке понять позицию китайского учeного по отношению к ошибке ЖанЖака Руссо в его «Музыкальном словаре» при цитировании китайской мелодии и выводам философа относительно универсальности законов европейской музыки. Рассматривается происхождение мелодии — примеры еe записи в более ранних источниках. Анализируется использование мелодии Руссо у Вебера и Хиндемита. Отмечается, что поиски всеобщих законов строения мира были актуальной темой для эпохи Просвещения, а музыка и до нашего времени претендует на роль универсального языка, несмотря на противоречивые результаты последних исследований университетских ученых Канады и Англии. Острая реакция г-на Ренькана на «канцелярскую ошибку» Руссо вызвана, видимо, тем, что коснулась ценного артефакта древней китайской культуры — мелодии «Вечная радость», история которой насчитывает не менее 1200 лет. Вторая причина заключается в невозможности исправить ошибку в созданных Вебером и Хиндемитом сочинениях на основе темы из «Музыкального словаря». Цань Ренькан призывает ученых быть осторожными в своей сфере исследований, компетентность исследователя должна подтверждаться и в справочных сведениях This study is a response to the article by Chinese musicologist Qian Renkang (1914-2013) in the journal “The Art of Music” No. 2, 1986 “Two hundred years of delusions: „Chinese melodies“ of Weber and Hindemith.” Its purpose is to try to understand the position of the Chinese scientist in relation to the error of Jean-Jacques Rousseau in his “Dictionary of Music” when quoting a Chinese melody and the philosopher’s conclusions regarding the universality of the laws of European music. The origin of the melody is considered — examples of its recording in earlier sources. The use of Rousseau’s melody in Weber and Hindemith is analyzed. It is noted that the search for universal laws of the structure of the world was a hot topic for the Age of Enlightenment, and music still claims to be a universal language to this day, despite the contradictory results of recent studies by university scientists in Canada and England. Mr. Renkang’s sharp reaction to Rousseau’s “office error” was also caused by the fact that it affected a valuable artifact of ancient Chinese culture — the melody “Eternal Joy”, the history of which goes back at least 1200 years. The second reason is the inability to correct the error of the melodies created by Weber and Hindemith. Can Renkang urges scientists to be careful in their field of research; the competence of the researcher should be confirmed in reference information
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 | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.006 | 0.010 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.012 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.024 | 0.008 |
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".