Güssingi glosszák: ismeretlen magyar glosszák egy 15. századi sermonariumban
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Manuscript I/33 of the Franciscan Monastery of Güssing (Austria) is a typical Late Medieval collection of sermons. Copied around the early/mid-15th century, the manuscript contains Latin sermons for Sundays and other ecclesiastical feasts. What is unique about this rather average-looking volume is that many of the sermons it preserves were glossed in vernacular Hungarian. Written between the lines and on the margins, occasionally also inside the main Latin text of the manuscript, these glosses preserve more than 600 words in Hungarian. On the basis of a marginal note in Latin, referencing the 1439 decree of the Council of Basel about the Immaculate Conception of the Virgin Mary, the main Latin text of the manuscript, together with the Hungarian glosses, recorded by the same hand, can be dated to the 2nd/3rd quarter of the 15th century. The manuscript was probably copied in the East-Austrian/West Hungarian region with both its content and script reflecting a very strong influence of German written culture. This influence affects the script and spelling of the vernacular Hungarian glosses alike. Marking Hungarian ö, ü, ő, ü with two dots placed diagonally above the relevant vowels is a remarkable feature of the glosses and probably the earliest occurrence of what became standard from the late 16th century onward. The use of the Latin abbreviation system for writing Hungarian to mark suffixes along with glosses containing only Hungarian suffixes above the Latin are all unique features of the Güssing Glosses. These special techniques of writing Hungarian reveal intriguing evidence for an advanced awareness of and erudition in Hungarian grammar in the early 15th century. In addition to the large number of Hungarian words, preserving a rich theological/ philosophical vocabulary, the Güssing Glosses provide unique insight into peculiar techniques of translating with “truncated” and “numerically encoded” glosses.
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 | 0.000 | 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.359 | 0.295 |
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".