„Sprache als Waffe“. Deutsch-tschechischer Sprachenwechsel im literarischen Leben in den böhmischen Ländern 1860–1890
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The efforts to create an explicite monolingual identity in the Czech lands starting from the first quarter of the 18th century were a subject of discussion for the educated elites, with some declaring them and some criticizing them, though it was also a priori demanded and sanctioned. The language switch symbolized, and also formed the foundation for, a cultural and ethnic transformation of identities and loyalties. This contribution is an attempt, built off of selected examples (e.g. by S. Kapper, F. Mikovec, A. Springer, A. Waldau, V. K. Sembera/Schembera), to verify the connections among several authors of both languages finding their place in the Czech lands’ cultural and literary life, and the above-mentioned theory on the genesis of ethnicity. Meanwhile he places the following questions at the forefront of his considerations: what was the motivation, meaning, and course of the language switch? How was the linguistic practice of literary writing disciplined and later monitored? Even though the examples analyzed serve here as a pars pro toto, a study should give reason to raise, more general questions about the reach and the various meanings (individual, cultural, social, and political) of the language switch and linguistic behavior.
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 | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.006 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".