MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W790800900 · doi:10.18290/rt.2016.63.4-24

Church Language at the Service of Gender Justice: The Example of the Lutheran Churches in the United States (ELCA) and Canada (ELCIC)

2014· article· en· W790800900 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueRoczniki Teologiczne · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicTheology and Canon Law Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPhilosophyArtHumanities

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article is aimed at presenting a certain limited and at the same time significant area on which such cultural and political pressure is exerted, i.e. the Churches’ language policies. The issue of language policy, which is seen as a symbol of actions undertaken for the sake of gender equality in church life, will be presented based on the example of the Lutheran Churches. This is because it is Lutherans who, in recent years, have been the most committed to promoting equality between, and equal rights for, women and men (especially in North America) in social, economic and political life as well as within the Church’s structures. The article begins with a presentation of the issue of gender justice in modern mainstream Lutheranism. Then the role of church language for this trend in the Church is shown as a tool in the fight for gender justice and for eliminating inequalities as well as negative stereotypes. Next, the official recommendations of the largest Lutheran Churches in North America are presented concerning the purification of church language and containing guidelines on its proper, non-discriminatory use. Finally, an attempt is made at presenting the results of Lutheran language policy.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.510
Threshold uncertainty score0.559

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.034
GPT teacher head0.225
Teacher spread0.191 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRoczniki TeologiczneSame topicTheology and Canon Law StudiesFrench-language works237,207