Puntuación y posición de construcciones temporales en la prosa historiográfica alfonsí
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ResumenLa topicalización de diversos constituyentes sintácticos es una característica que varios autores han calificado como rasgo propio de la prosa alfonsí para la consecución de la coherencia y cohesión (Elvira 1993 o Fernández-Ordóñez 2008-2009).Además, se ha observado que la posición en elementos subordinados -para los casos concretos de la Primera y Cuarta partes de la General estoria-constituía un factor fundamental para los hábitos de puntuación de los copistas, pues, dependiendo de si estos se hallaban en posición inicial, media o final, se puntuaban de una u otra manera (Las Heras Calvo 2023).El propósito de este trabajo es, por tanto, ampliar el objeto de estudio y analizar las semejanzas y diferencias que hay entre los hábitos interpuntivos de estos segmentos topicalizados en la General estoria y la Estoria de España.Considerando la variedad de cláusulas que pueden ser estudiadas, se ha limitado el análisis a un tipo de construcciones en concreto; se han escogido las proposiciones subordinadas temporales, por la importancia que estas tienen para enmarcar cronológicamente los hechos que se narran.
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 | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.010 | 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".