Sharedtasksareaworkformatprevalentinthenaturallanguageprocessingandmachinelearningcommunity. Thisspecial issue continues the reporting on the shared task SANTA (Systematic Analysis of Narrative levels Through Annotation), which has the development of annotation guidelines for narrative levels as its goal. Narrative levels, also known as embedded narrations, are omnipresent in many kinds of narrations, and one of the core concepts of narratology. In this introduction, we summarize the current state, report on the second annotation round in SANTA, draw some conclusions and, finally, derive some recommendations for future shared tasks in the digital humanities.
{"title":"On Organizing a Shared Task for the Digital Humanities – Conclusions and Future Paths","authors":"Evelyn Gius, M. Willand, Nils Reiter","doi":"10.22148/001c.30697","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.22148/001c.30697","url":null,"abstract":"Sharedtasksareaworkformatprevalentinthenaturallanguageprocessingandmachinelearningcommunity. Thisspecial issue continues the reporting on the shared task SANTA (Systematic Analysis of Narrative levels Through Annotation), which has the development of annotation guidelines for narrative levels as its goal. Narrative levels, also known as embedded narrations, are omnipresent in many kinds of narrations, and one of the core concepts of narratology. In this introduction, we summarize the current state, report on the second annotation round in SANTA, draw some conclusions and, finally, derive some recommendations for future shared tasks in the digital humanities.","PeriodicalId":33005,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Cultural Analytics","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-12-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"43690253","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Nora Ketschik, Benjamin Krautter, Sandra Murr, Yvonne Zimmermann
The article was written in the context of a Shared Task on the Analysis of Narrative levels Through Annotation (“SANTA”) which was published as a first draft in 2019. This revised version is based on further discussion on the formalization of the narratological concept of ‘narrative level.’ We firstly discuss the theory of narrative levels in literary studies, secondly derive features for the identification of narrative levels and finally develop guidelines for their annotation. An essential finding of the theoreticalworkliesinconnectingtheconceptof‘narrativelevel’tothenarrator. Byidentifyingdifferenttypesofnarrators,we are able to enumerate and categorize different scenarios for the emergence of new levels in narrative texts. Hereby, the article does not remain restricted to prototypical cases, but also deals with rare and problematic cases. Overall, our goal is to provide a theoretical reflection on narrative levels and to create accurate guidelines for its recognition. The method of approaching the phenomenon through annotation has proven to be extremely fruitful particularly in identifying the boundaries of the narrative levels.
{"title":"On the Theory of Narrative Levels and Their Annotation in the Digital Context","authors":"Nora Ketschik, Benjamin Krautter, Sandra Murr, Yvonne Zimmermann","doi":"10.22148/001c.30700","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.22148/001c.30700","url":null,"abstract":"The article was written in the context of a Shared Task on the Analysis of Narrative levels Through Annotation (“SANTA”) which was published as a first draft in 2019. This revised version is based on further discussion on the formalization of the narratological concept of ‘narrative level.’ We firstly discuss the theory of narrative levels in literary studies, secondly derive features for the identification of narrative levels and finally develop guidelines for their annotation. An essential finding of the theoreticalworkliesinconnectingtheconceptof‘narrativelevel’tothenarrator. Byidentifyingdifferenttypesofnarrators,we are able to enumerate and categorize different scenarios for the emergence of new levels in narrative texts. Hereby, the article does not remain restricted to prototypical cases, but also deals with rare and problematic cases. Overall, our goal is to provide a theoretical reflection on narrative levels and to create accurate guidelines for its recognition. The method of approaching the phenomenon through annotation has proven to be extremely fruitful particularly in identifying the boundaries of the narrative levels.","PeriodicalId":33005,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Cultural Analytics","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-12-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"46633623","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
It is rare for a story to have only a single narrative level: in fact, even the simplest stories usually contain multiple nested stories. The following is an annotation guide for encoding the boundaries between narrative levels, and which has been validated on modern fiction and TV scripts. We provided definitions of and give instructions for annotating information about each narrative level: embedded narratives, interruptive narrative, flashbacks (analepsis), and flashforwards (prolepsis). This annotation schema can be used for many types of narratological and computational research, however our intention in developing it was to lay the foundation for training computers to automatically extract narrative levels from long text.
{"title":"Narrative Boundaries Annotation Guide","authors":"Joshua D. Eisenberg, Mark A. Finlayson","doi":"10.22148/001c.30698","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.22148/001c.30698","url":null,"abstract":"It is rare for a story to have only a single narrative level: in fact, even the simplest stories usually contain multiple nested stories. The following is an annotation guide for encoding the boundaries between narrative levels, and which has been validated on modern fiction and TV scripts. We provided definitions of and give instructions for annotating information about each narrative level: embedded narratives, interruptive narrative, flashbacks (analepsis), and flashforwards (prolepsis). This annotation schema can be used for many types of narratological and computational research, however our intention in developing it was to lay the foundation for training computers to automatically extract narrative levels from long text.","PeriodicalId":33005,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Cultural Analytics","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-12-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"47064309","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Analysis of narrative structure can be said to answer the question “Who tells what, and how?”. The key part of our annotation scheme is related to the “who?”, and to this end we distinguish between narration and fictional dialogue. Furthermore, with respect to the latter we keep track of turns, lines, identities of speakers and addressees, and speech-framing constructions, which provide the narrator’s cues about the circumstances of the speech. We also annotate voice, that is, whether the narrator is ever present in the story or not. Our annotation of the “what?” includes embeddings of narrative transmission levels to capture stories in stories, and embeddings of fictional dialogue to capture characters quoting other characters. Our annotation of the “how?” includes focalization, that is, the perspective from which the narrative is seen and how much information the narrator has access to.
{"title":"Annotation Guideline No. 7 (revised): Guidelines for annotation of narrative structure","authors":"Mats Wirén, Adam Ek","doi":"10.22148/001c.30703","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.22148/001c.30703","url":null,"abstract":"Analysis of narrative structure can be said to answer the question “Who tells what, and how?”. The key part of our annotation scheme is related to the “who?”, and to this end we distinguish between narration and fictional dialogue. Furthermore, with respect to the latter we keep track of turns, lines, identities of speakers and addressees, and speech-framing constructions, which provide the narrator’s cues about the circumstances of the speech. We also annotate voice, that is, whether the narrator is ever present in the story or not. Our annotation of the “what?” includes embeddings of narrative transmission levels to capture stories in stories, and embeddings of fictional dialogue to capture characters quoting other characters. Our annotation of the “how?” includes focalization, that is, the perspective from which the narrative is seen and how much information the narrator has access to.","PeriodicalId":33005,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Cultural Analytics","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-12-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"44390364","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
These guidelines present a minimalist set of instructions for annotating narrative levels. They strive for clarity and brevity, with a focus on clear examples and helpful rules of thumb. They present a one-sentence definition of a narrative and introduce the “Let me tell you a story” rule of thumb for determining whether a narrative level boundary has been crossed. Only four attributes are introduced: narrative number, narrative level, narrator ID, and whether a given narrative is left “open” or is closed.
{"title":"Annotation Guidelines for Narrative Levels","authors":"Adam Hammond","doi":"10.22148/001c.30704","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.22148/001c.30704","url":null,"abstract":"These guidelines present a minimalist set of instructions for annotating narrative levels. They strive for clarity and brevity, with a focus on clear examples and helpful rules of thumb. They present a one-sentence definition of a narrative and introduce the “Let me tell you a story” rule of thumb for determining whether a narrative level boundary has been crossed. Only four attributes are introduced: narrative number, narrative level, narrator ID, and whether a given narrative is left “open” or is closed.","PeriodicalId":33005,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Cultural Analytics","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-12-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"47531517","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
This article furthers ongoing work on the merits of the feminist novel’s intrinsic variability by probing its dynamics in four publishing contexts: contemporary anglophone literary criticism, prestigious review publications, marketing materials, and online book reviews by social readers. We explore how these interpretive communities converge and diverge in their assessments of feminist fiction over the past twenty-five years by evaluating articles from the MLA International Bibliography , book reviews in The New York Times, The New Yorker, Times Literary Supp-lement, and other prominent periodicals, blurbs from Amazon, and Goodreads reviews. We trace the feminist novel’s ambivalent fates—or rather, feminist novel s ’ ambivalent fates—in and across these four domains. To do so, we engage computational methods of topic modeling, most distinctive word analysis, and named entity recognition. We synthesize these quantitative results with qualitative attention to provocative examples from our corpus. In so doing, we consider how literary scholars can develop more robust understandings of what feminism and feminist fiction mean to contemporary readers and what we stand to gain by bringing this diverse interpretive labor into our scholarly conversations. Our synthetic interpretive approach reveals these communities’ shared topical investments in feminist fiction, though the communities talk about these topics in importantly different ways. Together, their discourse converges on two organizing concerns: embodied subjectivity and temporality. Different configurations of these aspects of personhood in time inform the communities’ vocabularies, their modes of self-address, the rationales they offer for reading feminist novels, and the forms of feminist subjectivity they promote. Our analysis thus demonstrates how novel reading can function as a mode of forging feminist knowledge and constructing feminist value
{"title":"The Generative Dissensus of Reading the Feminist Novel, 1995-2020: A Computational Analysis of Interpretive Communities","authors":"Lisa Mendelman, Anna Mukamal","doi":"10.22148/001c.30009","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.22148/001c.30009","url":null,"abstract":"This article furthers ongoing work on the merits of the feminist novel’s intrinsic variability by probing its dynamics in four publishing contexts: contemporary anglophone literary criticism, prestigious review publications, marketing materials, and online book reviews by social readers. We explore how these interpretive communities converge and diverge in their assessments of feminist fiction over the past twenty-five years by evaluating articles from the MLA International Bibliography , book reviews in The New York Times, The New Yorker, Times Literary Supp-lement, and other prominent periodicals, blurbs from Amazon, and Goodreads reviews. We trace the feminist novel’s ambivalent fates—or rather, feminist novel s ’ ambivalent fates—in and across these four domains. To do so, we engage computational methods of topic modeling, most distinctive word analysis, and named entity recognition. We synthesize these quantitative results with qualitative attention to provocative examples from our corpus. In so doing, we consider how literary scholars can develop more robust understandings of what feminism and feminist fiction mean to contemporary readers and what we stand to gain by bringing this diverse interpretive labor into our scholarly conversations. Our synthetic interpretive approach reveals these communities’ shared topical investments in feminist fiction, though the communities talk about these topics in importantly different ways. Together, their discourse converges on two organizing concerns: embodied subjectivity and temporality. Different configurations of these aspects of personhood in time inform the communities’ vocabularies, their modes of self-address, the rationales they offer for reading feminist novels, and the forms of feminist subjectivity they promote. Our analysis thus demonstrates how novel reading can function as a mode of forging feminist knowledge and constructing feminist value","PeriodicalId":33005,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Cultural Analytics","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-11-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"48389653","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
The paper explores differences between bestsellers in print and the most popular audiobooks in a subscription-based streaming service for books (“beststreamers”) by means of computational stylistics. The point of departure is the complete set of print bestsellers and digital audiobook beststreamers for the Swedish book market 2015–2019, in total 172 novels. We probed 34 linguistic measures to track differences between subsets at the stylistic level. The results indicate that there are pronounced differences between the formats. Print bestsellers are longer, syntactically more complex and varied, and seem to focus more on depiction. Beststreaming audiobooks, by contrast, are shorter, more straightforwardly written, and appear to highlight plot and dialogue. The results are replicated when the comparison is restricted to crime fiction, the most prominent genre in the commercial top segment. Given these results, it is argued that it is possible to discern a particular audiobook style as one factor affecting book consumption in digital formats, and conversely that the printed format is associated with other stylistic preferences.
{"title":"Audiobook Stylistics: Comparing print and audio in the bestselling segment","authors":"Karl Berglund, Mats Dahllöf","doi":"10.22148/001c.29802","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.22148/001c.29802","url":null,"abstract":"The paper explores differences between bestsellers in print and the most popular audiobooks in a subscription-based streaming service for books (“beststreamers”) by means of computational stylistics. The point of departure is the complete set of print bestsellers and digital audiobook beststreamers for the Swedish book market 2015–2019, in total 172 novels. We probed 34 linguistic measures to track differences between subsets at the stylistic level. The results indicate that there are pronounced differences between the formats. Print bestsellers are longer, syntactically more complex and varied, and seem to focus more on depiction. Beststreaming audiobooks, by contrast, are shorter, more straightforwardly written, and appear to highlight plot and dialogue. The results are replicated when the comparison is restricted to crime fiction, the most prominent genre in the commercial top segment. Given these results, it is argued that it is possible to discern a particular audiobook style as one factor affecting book consumption in digital formats, and conversely that the printed format is associated with other stylistic preferences.","PeriodicalId":33005,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Cultural Analytics","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-11-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"45126415","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Announcing our five year anniversary, we look forward to a robust future of more cultural analytics.
在宣布成立五周年之际，我们期待着更多文化分析的强劲未来。
{"title":"Celebrating 5 Years of Cultural Analytics","authors":"A. Piper","doi":"10.22148/001c.28215","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.22148/001c.28215","url":null,"abstract":"Announcing our five year anniversary, we look forward to a robust future of more cultural analytics.","PeriodicalId":33005,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Cultural Analytics","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-09-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"44893236","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Network analysis of historical correspondence can be a fruitful way to address historical research questions, and has been increasingly used in historical studies over the past decade. As with many areas of quantitative humanities research, the reliability of the results are often called into question, given that such approaches require ’hard data’ as input, yet almost inevitably use datasets with partial or missing records. Other disciplines using network analysis have conducted robustness experiments designed to test the impact of data loss or error on their results. In order to test how this missing data might affect our own area of research, we conducted a number of experiments designed to simulate the impact of the kinds of loss often seen in historical correspondence data, including random document loss, missing years, and errors in the disambiguation and de-duplication process. The results show that most network centrality measures maintain robustness until a very large proportion of the data (60% or more) is removed. Some measures showed a linear change in robustness, while others remained high and then fell off sharply. Only one, transitivity (local clustering coefficient) was significantly impacted throughout. We tested a range of data loss scenarios (random single letters, folio books of manuscript letters, catalogues, and entire years) and a range of commonly used network metrics. In addition, we tested the robustness of more complex network analysis results in the literature that combine several network metrics to highlight individuals in the network, and found that the same types of individuals would have likely been highlighted even with 50% random letter loss. Alongside the article is a web application, built using Shiny, which will calculate robustness measures for a user-uploaded network dataset. We conclude that researchers working with similar historical correspondence datasets might be able to consider network analysis results to be robust in most cases, rather than work on the assumption that missing data would lead to very different findings or results.
{"title":"The Measure of the Archive: The Robustness of Network Analysis in Early Modern Correspondence","authors":"Y. Ryan, S. Ahnert","doi":"10.22148/001C.25943","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.22148/001C.25943","url":null,"abstract":"Network analysis of historical correspondence can be a fruitful way to address historical research questions, and has been increasingly used in historical studies over the past decade. As with many areas of quantitative humanities research, the reliability of the results are often called into question, given that such approaches require ’hard data’ as input, yet almost inevitably use datasets with partial or missing records. Other disciplines using network analysis have conducted robustness experiments designed to test the impact of data loss or error on their results. In order to test how this missing data might affect our own area of research, we conducted a number of experiments designed to simulate the impact of the kinds of loss often seen in historical correspondence data, including random document loss, missing years, and errors in the disambiguation and de-duplication process. The results show that most network centrality measures maintain robustness until a very large proportion of the data (60% or more) is removed. Some measures showed a linear change in robustness, while others remained high and then fell off sharply. Only one, transitivity (local clustering coefficient) was significantly impacted throughout. We tested a range of data loss scenarios (random single letters, folio books of manuscript letters, catalogues, and entire years) and a range of commonly used network metrics. In addition, we tested the robustness of more complex network analysis results in the literature that combine several network metrics to highlight individuals in the network, and found that the same types of individuals would have likely been highlighted even with 50% random letter loss. Alongside the article is a web application, built using Shiny, which will calculate robustness measures for a user-uploaded network dataset. We conclude that researchers working with similar historical correspondence datasets might be able to consider network analysis results to be robust in most cases, rather than work on the assumption that missing data would lead to very different findings or results.","PeriodicalId":33005,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Cultural Analytics","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-07-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"44538159","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
This essay brings probabilistic reasoning into concerted dialogue with book-historical and sociological approaches to world literature. Using extensive bibliographic data about literary translations into Japanese during the modern era, it develops a series of case studies at interrelated scales—the literary anthology, world library collections, and individual readers—to reason about the likelihood of certain authors or works being plucked from the swirling currents of the global traffic in books. At each scale, I consider how such data might inform the interpretations we give to the choice of one author over another in a given context. Woven into these case studies is an extended reflection on the history of probabilistic reasoning from the late-eighteenth century to the late-twentieth. What, this essay ultimately asks, might literary historians gain from taking this history seriously in our own appeals to chance as a form of historical explanation?
{"title":"Chance Encounters: World Literature Between the Unexpected and the Probable","authors":"Hoyt Long","doi":"10.22148/001C.25525","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.22148/001C.25525","url":null,"abstract":"This essay brings probabilistic reasoning into concerted dialogue with book-historical and sociological approaches to world literature. Using extensive bibliographic data about literary translations into Japanese during the modern era, it develops a series of case studies at interrelated scales—the literary anthology, world library collections, and individual readers—to reason about the likelihood of certain authors or works being plucked from the swirling currents of the global traffic in books. At each scale, I consider how such data might inform the interpretations we give to the choice of one author over another in a given context. Woven into these case studies is an extended reflection on the history of probabilistic reasoning from the late-eighteenth century to the late-twentieth. What, this essay ultimately asks, might literary historians gain from taking this history seriously in our own appeals to chance as a form of historical explanation?","PeriodicalId":33005,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Cultural Analytics","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-07-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"49174131","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：