"Liebes-Töten" : zur Objektwerdung der Frau im Roman der Frühromantik : Novalisʹ Heinrich von Ofterdingen, Friedrich HÃlderlins Hyperion, Friedrich Schlegels Lucinde
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The aim of this comparative study of Novalis' Heinrich von Ofterdingen , Holderlin's Hyperion, and Schlegel's Lucinde is to develop a comprehensive overview of the role of woman in conceptions of male subjectivity in Early German Romanticism. The reading of the novels developed here examines the Early Romantic poetics with a specific view to the conceptualizations of woman contained therein. The Early Romantic 'Project' consists in the rewriting of the subject and the world in the medium of poetry. Tanscendental poetry, the fragment, allegory, and irony are intended to invoke the presence of an absence, that is the absolute. In the concrete praxis in the novels, these concepts of Early Romantic poetics imply conceptualizations of woman. They articulate a specific approach in the encounter of the male subject with the female object. At the center of Romantic poetics lies the encounter with woman. The unique situatedness of the romantic subject is, indeed, crystallized in this encounter.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.008 | 0.016 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".