Ukotvenost a ukotvitelnost pojmu barok v Äeských literárnÃch vodách
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In Bohemian literary sources the terms “Baroque” and “Baroque literature” are not clarified, defined, or generally accepted. Some scholars talk about the birth or establishment of Baroque thought in the Bohemian Lands as having taken place about 1550. A frequent view is that Baroque literature began to assert itself in the Bohemian Lands shortly before the Battle of the White Mountain (1620). One also occasionally hears the opinion that Baroque literature did not begin in the Bohemian Lands till the 1680s.\nIn dictionaries and other works concerned with literary theory and history the term “Baroque literature” is normally linked with the theme of the fleetingness of life and of all earthly things and with the vivid depiction of the four last things (heaven, hell, death, and judgement), especially death. In Czech literature, one finds these themes most often in the period from the third quarter of the sixteenth century to the third quarter of the seventeenth century. Increased interest in death and fleetingness is, however, linked not only with Baroque thought but also, at least to the same extent, with late humanist thought. It is precisely the predilection for theatricality, frequently mentioned in connection with Baroque literature, which is linked with the humanist predilection for the expressively drawn backdrop of the story or interpretation and with the late humanist conception of the world as a theatre and of human life as a theatrical role. Other features of Baroque literature are said to be, for example, its dynamism, the attempt to intensify impression and expression, high dramatic tension and overstressing, and the use of paradox. If, for example, we look for dynamism and paradox in Czech literature of the period from the 1620s to the 1670s, we find it – as in the pre-White-Mountain literature – to be relatively marginal. \n In the literature of the years 1600–80 much changed very slowly. Writers probably began to search for new sources of inspiration and in some cases enlarged the circles of authors and works they considered authorities. Apart from Classical Antiquity and patristics in the literary work of the second and last third of the seventeenth century, an ever greater role was played by the literary tradition of the High Middle Ages. Folklore also became an increasingly important source of inspiration for writers. In addition, the relationship between the writer, language, and the printed word underwent certain changes. Language, on the one hand, was closely linked with the attitude to one’s native region and country and to the tradition of catholicity; on the other hand, the possibilities of language were gradually being made relative: writers became increasingly conscious that much remained inexpressible with words, and even took refuge from time to time in the declaration – often stylized – about their own inability to express certain things in words.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.078 | 0.018 |
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".