ЗВ՚ЯЗКИ ІВАНА ФРАНКА ІЗ ПОЛЬСЬКОМОВНИМ СЕРЕДОВИЩЕМ ДРОГОБИЧА В ОСТАННІЙ ЧВЕРТІ ХІХ – НА ПОЧАТКУ ХХ ст.: НА МАТЕРІАЛАХ ЕПІСТОЛЯРНОЇ СПАДЩИНИ УКРАЇНСЬКОГО ВЧЕНОГО
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract. The article, based on the materials of Ivan Franko՚s epistolary heritage, traces his ties with the Polish-speaking inhabitants in Drohobych (last quarter of the nineteenth and early twentieth centuries). The study emphasizes that letters to I. Franko occupy a leading place in the field of Franko studies, since their content allows researchers of Franko studies to receive a number of little-known facts from the life and multi-faceted activities of not only the scholar himself but also his correspondents.It was found that the local Polish correspondence, addressed to the scholar from Drohobych, allows us to trace the peculiarities of I. Frankо՚s creativity and serve as a source for a comprehensive study of his connections with the diverse social layers of the city, the types of activities of correspondents, unknown to today biographical facts of personal life of those who at one time communicated with the scholar and made a certain contribution in the formation of his views, beliefs, etc.In the course of the research, it was found that among the Polish-speaking citizens of Drohobych who actively corresponded with Ivan Franko were such prominent educators and socio-cultural figures as: educators Zegota Dashko and Ignacy Dashinsky, bookstore owner F. Schepansky, Polish drama actor Adolf Valek-Walewski, correspondents and journalists (correspondent of «Gazeta Naddniestrzańska» Adolf Inlander, editor of «Gazeta Naddniestrzańska» Edmund Soletsky).In addition, it is noted that there were other Polish letters to Ivan Franko who had a mailbox in Drohobych. Their authors were mainly Drohobych lawyers of the Jewish origin, in particular lawyers Salo Gainsberg, Isaac Tigerman and Izidor Lyuterbach who, as evident from the content of the epistolary, helped the scholar to legally solve personal and family problems. Also, among Drohobych lawyers, in particular Ukrainian, there were those who translated I. Frankо՚s works into Polish. In this context, the name of Volodymyr Kobryn is mentioned, who translated Franko՚s «Moses». In addition to the lawyers, the owner of the bookstore in Drogobych, V. Ungar, the correspondent of «Dziennik Polski» A. Inlander, who at one time suggested that the scholar who also wrote in Polish should take his place as correspondent of «Kurjer Lwowsky».
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.007 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.018 | 0.006 |
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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".