{ "model": { "rank": 6469, "code": "thing-q459381", "model_id": "vr.tr.literary-theory", "name": "literary theory", "purpose": "Enable an AI agent to recognise a literary theory, assess the clarity and support of its claims, and determine where and how it may guide literary interpretation.", "family": "Thing Registry", "category": "Information and virtual systems", "status": "research-draft", "kind": "thing", "plane": "INF", "domain": "INF.KNW", "industry": "", "version": "", "url": "/models/thing/q459381/", "tier": 2, "score": 60, "payload": { "layer": "wikidata", "aliases": [ "Ten Commandments of Detection", "narratology" ], "aliasCount": 2, "merged": 2, "knownIn": 60, "facets": null, "markers": [], "lexicalClass": "", "senseRank": null, "alsoRegisteredAs": null, "source": { "dataset": "wikidata", "item": "Q459381", "url": "https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q459381", "license": "CC0 1.0" } }, "research": { "vercy": "1.0-draft", "publication": { "status": "research-draft", "adjudicationStatus": "unreviewed", "publishableCanonical": false, "generatedAt": "2026-09-07T14:43:23Z", "providers": [ "Codex", "Grok" ], "missingProviders": [], "pass": 2, "cost": { "grok": { "usd": 0.00358666, "turns": 1, "seconds": 46.2, "error": null }, "codex": { "seconds": 82.9, "error": "Reading additional input from stdin...\nOpenAI Codex v0.153.3\n--------\nworkdir: R:\\02_PROJECTS\\02_Meta_Models_Platforms\\Ver.cy\\current\\thing-registry-backlog\nmodel: gpt-6-astra\nprovider: openai\napproval: never\nsandbox: read-only\nreasoning effort: none\nreasoning summaries: none\nsession id: 01a07c51-a803-7143-99cd-5dcec9dc385e\n--------\nuser\nYou are drafting a Vercy meta-model for one registered thing. Answer as JSON only, no prose around it.\n\nThing: literary theory\nRegistry id: vr.tr.literary-theory\nPlane / domain: INF / INF.KNW\nRegistry definition: (none recorded)\nNames folded into this entry: (" } } }, "metaModel": { "id": "THING-Q459381", "registryId": "vr.tr.literary-theory", "name": "literary theory", "version": "0.1.0-research.1", "entryKind": "thing", "family": "Thing Registry", "domain": [ "INF.KNW" ], "status": "research-draft" }, "canonicalUrl": "https://ver.cy/models/thing/q459381/", "model": { "registry_id": "vr.tr.literary-theory", "name": "literary theory", "purpose": "Enable an AI agent to recognise a literary theory, assess the clarity and support of its claims, and determine where and how it may guide literary interpretation.", "definition": "Literary theory is the systematic body of concepts, methods, and arguments through which literature is described, interpreted, evaluated, and related to language, history, culture, and other arts, as distinct from the practical criticism of particular works.", "scope_statement": "This model owns a literary theory as an identifiable framework of concepts, assumptions and interpretive commitments concerning literature, literary meaning, form, value, production or reception, including its variants, methodological consequences and limits.", "in_scope": [ "The theory's conception of literature and the phenomena it seeks to explain", "Core concepts, propositions and assumptions about texts, authors, readers and contexts", "Interpretive operations and standards for supporting or challenging readings", "Intellectual lineage, internal variants and disagreements over attribution", "Applicability, criticism and changes to the theory's commitments" ], "out_of_scope": [ "Individual literary works, editions and textual witnesses as independently managed objects", "Complete interpretations or evaluations of particular works", "Author biographies and literary historical periods beyond their relevance to theoretical claims", "Linguistic or philosophical theories without a specified literary application", "Curricula, scholarly organisations and publication workflows" ], "distinguishing_features": [ "It makes commitments intended to apply beyond a single reading; an interpretation of one work alone does not establish a literary theory.", "It addresses literary phenomena or explicitly connects broader concepts to literary interpretation; a philosophical position alone is insufficient.", "It explains or justifies what an interpretive procedure can reveal; a sequence of analytical steps alone is a method.", "It supplies conceptual commitments rather than merely naming a period, genre or group of writers.", "A school label counts as one identifiable theory only when shared commitments can be recorded without erasing consequential disagreements." ], "characteristics": [ { "name": "Theoretical object", "kind": "category", "unit_or_values": "One or more of literariness, form, narrative, meaning, authorship, reading, value, production, circulation or other explicitly defined object", "why_it_matters": "Determines which literary phenomena the theory can reasonably be asked to explain." }, { "name": "Claim orientation", "kind": "category", "unit_or_values": "Descriptive, explanatory, interpretive, evaluative, normative or explicitly mixed", "why_it_matters": "Prevents an agent from treating a prescription about reading as an empirical explanation." }, { "name": "Locus of interpretive authority", "kind": "category", "unit_or_values": "Textual organisation, authorial intention, reader activity, interpretive community, historical conditions, distributed or contested", "why_it_matters": "Identifies which considerations can warrant or constrain a reading within the theory." }, { "name": "Concept dependency", "kind": "relation", "unit_or_values": "Named concept linked to prerequisite concepts, adopted meanings and explicitly rejected meanings", "why_it_matters": "Helps prevent incompatible uses of the same theoretical vocabulary." }, { "name": "Declared applicability", "kind": "relation", "unit_or_values": "Links to literary forms, media, languages, traditions and periods, qualified as claimed, demonstrated, disputed or excluded", "why_it_matters": "Separates a theory's proposed reach from the contexts in which its use has been examined." }, { "name": "Interpretive warrant", "kind": "category", "unit_or_values": "Textual pattern, archival evidence, linguistic analysis, reception evidence, conceptual argument, ideological critique or another specified warrant", "why_it_matters": "Makes the grounds of an interpretation inspectable." }, { "name": "Framework specification state", "kind": "state", "unit_or_values": "Unresolved label, partially specified framework, articulated variant or disputed reconstruction", "why_it_matters": "Signals whether an agent has enough information to attribute commitments and apply the framework." }, { "name": "Relation to another framework", "kind": "relation", "unit_or_values": "Extends, revises, rejects, borrows from, overlaps with or is incompatible with, qualified by the particular claim or concept", "why_it_matters": "Supports comparisons without assuming entire schools are uniformly compatible or opposed." } ], "affordances": [ "Identify the commitments that distinguish a named theory or variant from adjacent frameworks.", "Construct a theory-specific reading plan with explicit evidence requirements.", "Check whether an interpretation follows the framework's concepts and inferential commitments.", "Compare how competing theories frame the same literary problem.", "Flag applications that exceed documented scope or combine incompatible assumptions.", "Record objections, unresolved tensions and revisions without presenting contested claims as settled." ] }, "sources": [ { "id": "sep-literary-theory", "title": "Literary Theory", "url": "", "what_it_supports": "Specialist definition of literary theory as a field of concepts and methods for interpreting literature, distinct from applied criticism.", "url_status": "dead" }, { "id": "wd-q208217", "title": "literary theory", "url": "https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q208217", "what_it_supports": "Identifier and classification of literary theory as a branch of literary studies.", "url_status": "live" }, { "id": "culler-lt", "title": "Literary Theory: A Very Short Introduction", "url": "", "what_it_supports": "Standard survey of kinds of theory (structuralism, post-structuralism, psychoanalysis, feminism, reader-response, postcolonial) as practiced in the academy." }, { "id": "norton-anthology-theory", "title": "The Norton Anthology of Theory and Criticism", "url": "", "what_it_supports": "Canonical map of schools and neighbours (poetics, aesthetics, rhetoric, criticism) used in university teaching." } ], "structure": { "bundles": [ { "id": "literature-and-explanatory-object", "name": "Literature and explanatory object", "description": "Records what the theory treats as literary and what it aims to explain about it.", "rationale": "An agent needs to distinguish a theory's object of inquiry from the works used to illustrate it.", "layers": [ { "id": "literary-boundary", "name": "Literary boundary", "description": "Captures the theory's treatment of the boundary between literary and other discourse.", "findings": [ { "id": "basis-of-literariness", "name": "Basis of literariness", "description": "Record whether literary status depends on formal features, conventions, institutions, reading practices or another basis, including refusal of a fixed boundary.", "questions": [ { "text": "What, if anything, makes a text or practice literary according to this framework?", "kind": "definition", "id": "basis-of-literariness-q01" }, { "text": "How does the framework handle oral, digital or otherwise disputed cases at its literary boundary?", "kind": "boundary", "id": "basis-of-literariness-q02" } ] } ] }, { "id": "explanatory-target", "name": "Explanatory target", "description": "Specifies the literary problem and scale addressed by the theory.", "findings": [ { "id": "problem-and-scale", "name": "Problem and scale", "description": "Record whether the framework concerns devices, works, genres, reading events or literary institutions, and what kind of claim it makes about them.", "questions": [ { "text": "Which problem of literary form, meaning, value or social operation does the framework address?", "kind": "definition", "id": "problem-and-scale-q01" }, { "text": "Which changes of scale, such as moving from a passage to a literary institution, require additional justification?", "kind": "boundary", "id": "problem-and-scale-q02" } ] } ] } ] }, { "id": "meaning-and-interpretive-authority", "name": "Meaning and interpretive authority", "description": "Records how the theory understands meaning and allocates authority among text, author, reader and context.", "rationale": "These commitments determine which readings the framework permits and how an agent should handle disagreement.", "layers": [ { "id": "constitution-of-meaning", "name": "Constitution of meaning", "description": "Captures the relationships through which literary meaning is understood to arise.", "findings": [ { "id": "meaning-producing-relations", "name": "Meaning-producing relations", "description": "Record the roles assigned to textual organisation, intention, reader activity, language and historical circumstances without presupposing that one dominates.", "questions": [ { "text": "How does the framework explain the relationship between textual features and the production of meaning?", "kind": "definition", "id": "meaning-producing-relations-q01" }, { "text": "Under what conditions may authorial intention, reader response or historical context constrain a reading?", "kind": "boundary", "id": "meaning-producing-relations-q02" } ] } ] }, { "id": "interpretive-plurality", "name": "Interpretive plurality", "description": "Records how the framework distinguishes legitimate variation from unsupported interpretation.", "findings": [ { "id": "limits-on-readings", "name": "Limits on readings", "description": "Capture whether conflicting readings can coexist and what could count against an interpretation.", "questions": [ { "text": "What makes a reading warranted, inadequate or inadmissible within this framework?", "kind": "definition", "id": "limits-on-readings-q01" }, { "text": "How should an agent proceed when two readings satisfy the framework's stated criteria but conflict?", "kind": "action", "id": "limits-on-readings-q02" } ] } ] } ] }, { "id": "concepts-and-reading-practice", "name": "Concepts and reading practice", "description": "Connects theoretical vocabulary to defensible operations on literary material.", "rationale": "An agent must be able to use concepts in analysis without reducing them to labels attached to passages.", "layers": [ { "id": "conceptual-commitments", "name": "Conceptual commitments", "description": "Identifies indispensable concepts and the propositions connecting them.", "findings": [ { "id": "concept-roles-and-dependencies", "name": "Concept roles and dependencies", "description": "Record theory-specific meanings, dependencies and differences from ordinary or rival uses of the same terms.", "questions": [ { "text": "Which concepts and propositions must be retained for a reading to count as an application of this theory?", "kind": "definition", "id": "concept-roles-and-dependencies-q01" }, { "text": "Which apparently shared terms have meanings that prevent direct substitution from another framework?", "kind": "boundary", "id": "concept-roles-and-dependencies-q02" } ] } ] }, { "id": "analytical-operations", "name": "Analytical operations", "description": "Describes how an analyst moves from literary material to a theoretically warranted claim.", "findings": [ { "id": "evidence-to-interpretation", "name": "Evidence to interpretation", "description": "Record what to attend to, what contextual material is needed and which inferential steps require justification.", "questions": [ { "text": "What should an agent examine in a work or its reception, and what additional material does that examination require?", "kind": "action", "id": "evidence-to-interpretation-q01" }, { "text": "What justifies moving from an observed feature to the theoretical interpretation rather than merely naming the feature?", "kind": "definition", "id": "evidence-to-interpretation-q02" } ] } ] } ] }, { "id": "lineage-and-variant-identity", "name": "Lineage and variant identity", "description": "Distinguishes documented theoretical commitments from later labels, reconstructions and divergent variants.", "rationale": "A literary theory may be represented by multiple formulations whose differences affect attribution and application.", "layers": [ { "id": "attribution-and-formulation", "name": "Attribution and formulation", "description": "Locates the formulations used to identify the framework.", "findings": [ { "id": "documented-commitment-basis", "name": "Documented commitment basis", "description": "Record where a commitment is explicitly stated, reconstructed by commentators or contested, with attention to edition and translation.", "questions": [ { "text": "Which passages and editions support the commitments attributed to this theory?", "kind": "provenance", "id": "documented-commitment-basis-q01" }, { "text": "Was the framework's name used by its associated thinkers or assigned by later interpreters?", "kind": "provenance", "id": "documented-commitment-basis-q02" } ] } ] }, { "id": "internal-and-external-relations", "name": "Internal and external relations", "description": "Records differences within a tradition and its specific debts or objections to other frameworks.", "findings": [ { "id": "variant-defining-differences", "name": "Variant-defining differences", "description": "Identify which disagreements alter interpretive commitments and which are differences of terminology or emphasis.", "questions": [ { "text": "Which differences between formulations change what evidence or readings the theory admits?", "kind": "boundary", "id": "variant-defining-differences-q01" }, { "text": "What documented argument supports describing a formulation as an extension, revision or rejection of another?", "kind": "provenance", "id": "variant-defining-differences-q02" } ] } ] } ] }, { "id": "applicability-and-critical-assessment", "name": "Applicability and critical assessment", "description": "Records the framework's demonstrated uses, transfer limits and unresolved objections.", "rationale": "An agent needs grounds for deciding whether to apply, qualify or reconsider the theory in a particular literary task.", "layers": [ { "id": "corpus-and-transfer", "name": "Corpus and transfer", "description": "Separates claimed generality from applications supported by examined literary material.", "findings": [ { "id": "application-conditions", "name": "Application conditions", "description": "Record the forms, languages, media and traditions used to develop or apply the theory, and assumptions that may obstruct transfer.", "questions": [ { "text": "Which literary materials support the framework's claimed reach, and which remain unexamined?", "kind": "provenance", "id": "application-conditions-q01" }, { "text": "What must an agent check before extending the framework to another language, medium or literary tradition?", "kind": "action", "id": "application-conditions-q02" } ] } ] }, { "id": "objections-and-revision", "name": "Objections and revision", "description": "Captures challenges to the theory and their consequences for its use.", "findings": [ { "id": "challenge-and-response-status", "name": "Challenge and response status", "description": "Record objections concerning coherence, explanatory reach, interpretive warrant or evaluative commitments, alongside responses and remaining uncertainty.", "questions": [ { "text": "Which documented objections challenge a core commitment, and how have proponents responded?", "kind": "provenance", "id": "challenge-and-response-status-q01" }, { "text": "What unresolved objection or counterexample would require an agent to qualify, revise or suspend this application?", "kind": "action", "id": "challenge-and-response-status-q02" } ] } ] } ] }, { "id": "evidence-and-external-alignment", "name": "Evidence and external alignment", "description": "What the world already says about this thing, gathered so the model can be checked against it.", "rationale": "A model that cannot be lined up against existing standards, identifiers and practice cannot be adopted by anyone who already uses them.", "layers": [ { "id": "reported-evidence", "name": "Reported evidence", "description": "Findings from the breadth pass, kept separate from the structural claims.", "findings": [ { "id": "evidence-kinds", "name": "Kinds and varieties", "description": "Reported by the breadth pass; each item needs checking against its source before it becomes normative.", "evidence": [ "formalism and New Criticism", "structuralism and narratology", "post-structuralism and deconstruction", "psychoanalytic criticism", "Marxist and materialist criticism", "feminist, gender, and queer theory", "reader-response and reception theory", "postcolonial and cultural studies approaches" ], "questions": [ { "id": "evidence-kinds-q01", "text": "Which of these kinds and varieties hold for the sense of literary theory this model covers, and on what evidence?", "kind": "provenance" } ] }, { "id": "evidence-identifiers", "name": "Identifiers and schemes", "description": "Reported by the breadth pass; each item needs checking against its source before it becomes normative.", "evidence": [ { "scheme": "Wikidata", "value_or_pattern": "Q208217", "note": "item 'literary theory'" }, { "scheme": "Library of Congress Subject Headings", "value_or_pattern": "Literature - Theory", "note": "LCSH heading used in cataloguing" }, { "scheme": "Dewey Decimal Classification", "value_or_pattern": "801", "note": "philosophy and theory of literature" } ], "questions": [ { "id": "evidence-identifiers-q01", "text": "Which of these identifiers and schemes hold for the sense of literary theory this model covers, and on what evidence?", "kind": "provenance" } ] }, { "id": "evidence-real-world-use", "name": "Real-world use", "description": "Reported by the breadth pass; each item needs checking against its source before it becomes normative.", "evidence": [ "University courses and exam syllabi in English, comparative literature, and modern languages.", "Editorial apparatus of scholarly editions and journals (methods sections, theoretical frames).", "Book-review and prize-jury language when judges invoke form, ideology, or reader effect.", "Secondary-school and A-level / AP literature teaching of critical approaches.", "Digital humanities projects that encode narrative, genre, or reception models." ], "questions": [ { "id": "evidence-real-world-use-q01", "text": "Which of these real-world use hold for the sense of literary theory this model covers, and on what evidence?", "kind": "provenance" } ] }, { "id": "evidence-measurements", "name": "Typical measurements", "description": "Reported by the breadth pass; each item needs checking against its source before it becomes normative.", "evidence": [ { "quantity": "citation share of a school in a period corpus", "typical_range": "low single digits to tens of percent of theory citations", "unit": "%" }, { "quantity": "course contact hours devoted to theory in a literature degree", "typical_range": "0-12", "unit": "semester credit hours" } ], "questions": [ { "id": "evidence-measurements-q01", "text": "Which of these typical measurements hold for the sense of literary theory this model covers, and on what evidence?", "kind": "provenance" } ] }, { "id": "evidence-failure-modes-and-hazards", "name": "Failure modes and hazards", "description": "Reported by the breadth pass; each item needs checking against its source before it becomes normative.", "evidence": [ "Theory applied as a jargon overlay without changing the reading of the text.", "Anachronistic imposition of a later school onto a work and period that cannot support it.", "Collapse of theory into political or identity slogans, losing descriptive force.", "Canon and syllabus capture: one school crowding out others in hiring and assessment.", "Misidentification of a method (e.g. calling close reading 'deconstruction')." ], "questions": [ { "id": "evidence-failure-modes-and-hazards-q01", "text": "Which of these failure modes and hazards hold for the sense of literary theory this model covers, and on what evidence?", "kind": "provenance" } ] }, { "id": "evidence-regional-variation", "name": "Regional variation", "description": "Reported by the breadth pass; each item needs checking against its source before it becomes normative.", "evidence": [ "Anglophone 'literary theory' vs. continental 'theory' / Theorie overlapping philosophy and Kulturwissenschaft.", "French théorie littéraire historically closer to poetics and narratology (e.g. Genette, Todorov) than to cultural studies.", "German Literaturtheorie and Literaturwissenschaft keep poetics, hermeneutics, and philology more distinct from 'Theory' as a 1970s-90s import.", "Postcolonial and decolonial theory more central in South Asian, African, and Latin American departments than in some European philologies.", "Chinese and Japanese programs often teach Western theory as a named import alongside indigenous poetics (wenxue lilun, bungaku riron)." ], "questions": [ { "id": "evidence-regional-variation-q01", "text": "Which of these regional variation hold for the sense of literary theory this model covers, and on what evidence?", "kind": "provenance" } ] }, { "id": "evidence-neighbours", "name": "Neighbouring kinds and how to tell them apart", "description": "Reported by the breadth pass; each item needs checking against its source before it becomes normative.", "evidence": [ { "name": "literary criticism", "difference": "Criticism interprets or evaluates particular works; theory supplies the general concepts and methods those readings use." }, { "name": "poetics", "difference": "Poetics describes how literary forms work (genre, metre, narrative); theory may include poetics but also ideology, subjectivity, and history." }, { "name": "aesthetics", "difference": "Aesthetics is the philosophy of art and beauty across media; literary theory is literature-specific and often linguistic or cultural rather than beauty-centred." }, { "name": "rhetoric", "difference": "Rhetoric studies persuasion and figuration in discourse generally; literary theory treats literature as a distinct object, though the two share tropes and reader effects." }, { "name": "hermeneutics", "difference": "Hermeneutics is the general theory of interpretation (texts, law, scripture); literary theory is a cluster of literature-focused schools, only some of which are hermeneutic." }, { "name": "cultural studies", "difference": "Cultural studies takes popular and media culture as its object; literary theory remains accountable to literary texts even when it borrows cultural-studies methods." } ], "questions": [ { "id": "evidence-neighbours-q01", "text": "Which of these neighbouring kinds and how to tell them apart hold for the sense of literary theory this model covers, and on what evidence?", "kind": "provenance" } ] } ] } ] } ] }, "openQuestions": [ "What registry definition should distinguish literary theory from literary criticism, poetics and literary aesthetics while preserving their legitimate overlap?", "Should an instance represent a named school, a particular formulation or either, and how should variants be represented without creating duplicate registered things?", "Which assessment criteria can compare frameworks fairly when they disagree about what interpretation and evidence are for?", "How should the model represent traditions whose theoretical commitments are embedded in commentary or literary practice rather than explicit theoretical treatises?", "What evidence is sufficient to distinguish a framework's demonstrated applicability from a merely asserted extension across languages, media and literary traditions?" ], "statistics": { "bundles": 6, "layers": 11, "findings": 17, "questions": 27 } }, "draft": { "generator": "vr.draft.v3", "status": "draft-generated", "researched": false, "archetype": "discipline or field of knowledge", "method": "Written from the archetype playbook - what this kind of thing needs beyond identity and provenance - and from the structure that recurred across 6,333 models already researched by two engines. Applied to this entry by rule. No source was read for this thing and no claim here is researched. This entry carries no facets of its own, so they were inferred from its domain - a guess about a whole domain applied to one thing.", "facetsInferred": true, "nextPass": "A researcher replaces this draft with a sourced specification. Treat every sentence below as a proposal to argue with.", "purpose": "Give an agent a durable, checkable way to recognise a literary theory, record what state it is in, and decide what may be done with it.", "whatItIs": "Enable an AI agent to recognise a literary theory, assess the clarity and support of its claims, and determine where and how it may guide literary interpretation.", "characteristics": { "substance": "information", "origin": "conceptual", "agency": "inert" }, "whatYouCanDoWithIt": [ "read and interpreted" ], "distinguishingFeatures": [ "Names folded into this entry, which a task may need to split apart again: Ten Commandments of Detection, narratology.", "2 finer distinctions are held as aliases rather than separate entries, because telling them apart needs a task that asks for it.", "Described in 60 Wikipedia languages, which is a measure of how widely the thing is known, not of how important it is." ], "openQuestionsForResearch": [ "Which of the bundles below does a real task actually need, and which are ceremony?", "What does this thing have that the facets do not capture at all?", "Which neighbouring kind is most often confused with a literary theory, and on what evidence are they told apart?" ], "whatItIsMadeOf": "content that has to be carried by something else", "physicalCharacter": [ "Does nothing on its own; everything it does, something else did to it.", "These come from the domain this entry sits in rather than from the entry itself, so treat them as a first guess about the whole domain applied to one thing." ], "whatCanBeDoneWithIt": [ "read it and act on what it says" ], "howItIsRecognised": [], "relatedModels": [ { "relation": "covers", "note": "Finer kinds folded into this entry because telling them apart needs a task that asks for it. Each is a model waiting to be split out when one does.", "targets": [ "Ten Commandments of Detection", "narratology" ] } ], "standing": "Described in 60 Wikipedia languages, which measures how widely it is written about rather than how important or how common it is. 2 finer distinctions are held inside this entry as names rather than as separate models.", "structure": { "bundles": [ { "id": "identity-and-classification", "name": "Identity, naming and classification", "description": "How an agent tells one literary theory from another, and a literary theory from things that resemble it.", "rationale": "Recognition comes before every other claim. Without stable identity nothing else in the model can be trusted to be about the same thing twice.", "layers": [ { "id": "naming-and-identifiers", "name": "Names and identifiers", "description": "The names this thing goes by and the identifiers that survive translation and time.", "findings": [ { "id": "preferred-name-and-aliases", "name": "Preferred name, aliases and local names", "description": "Which name to use, which names mean the same thing, and which merely sound similar.", "questions": [ { "id": "preferred-name-and-aliases-q01", "text": "What identifies and describes the name of a literary theory, and in what units or vocabulary?", "kind": "definition", "answer_data": [ "identifiers", "types and classes", "values with units", "explicit unknowns" ] }, { "id": "preferred-name-and-aliases-q02", "text": "Who or what asserted this about the name of a literary theory, by which method, and when was it true?", "kind": "provenance", "answer_data": [ "authority", "method", "evidence", "event time", "knowledge time" ] }, { "id": "preferred-name-and-aliases-q03", "text": "What may an agent decide or do once the name of a literary theory is known, and what must it refuse?", "kind": "action", "answer_data": [ "permitted actions", "preconditions", "refusals", "escalation" ] } ] }, { "id": "stable-identifiers", "name": "Stable identifiers and external keys", "description": "Identifiers that keep pointing at this kind of thing across systems and languages.", "questions": [ { "id": "stable-identifiers-q01", "text": "What identifies and describes an identifier for a literary theory, and in what units or vocabulary?", "kind": "definition", "answer_data": [ "identifiers", "types and classes", "values with units", "explicit unknowns" ] }, { "id": "stable-identifiers-q02", "text": "Who or what asserted this about an identifier for a literary theory, by which method, and when was it true?", "kind": "provenance", "answer_data": [ "authority", "method", "evidence", "event time", "knowledge time" ] }, { "id": "stable-identifiers-q03", "text": "What may an agent decide or do once an identifier for a literary theory is known, and what must it refuse?", "kind": "action", "answer_data": [ "permitted actions", "preconditions", "refusals", "escalation" ] } ] } ] }, { "id": "classification-and-granularity", "name": "Classification and granularity", "description": "Where a literary theory sits among kinds, and how finely a task needs to cut it.", "findings": [ { "id": "kind-and-parents", "name": "Kind, parents and neighbouring kinds", "description": "The classes this thing belongs to and the ones it is next to.", "questions": [ { "id": "kind-and-parents-q01", "text": "What identifies and describes the kind of a literary theory, and in what units or vocabulary?", "kind": "definition", "answer_data": [ "identifiers", "types and classes", "values with units", "explicit unknowns" ] }, { "id": "kind-and-parents-q02", "text": "Who or what asserted this about the kind of a literary theory, by which method, and when was it true?", "kind": "provenance", "answer_data": [ "authority", "method", "evidence", "event time", "knowledge time" ] }, { "id": "kind-and-parents-q03", "text": "What may an agent decide or do once the kind of a literary theory is known, and what must it refuse?", "kind": "action", "answer_data": [ "permitted actions", "preconditions", "refusals", "escalation" ] } ] }, { "id": "distinguishing-features", "name": "Distinguishing features", "description": "What separates a literary theory from the things most often confused with it.", "questions": [ { "id": "distinguishing-features-q01", "text": "What identifies and describes what distinguishes a literary theory, and in what units or vocabulary?", "kind": "definition", "answer_data": [ "identifiers", "types and classes", "values with units", "explicit unknowns" ] }, { "id": "distinguishing-features-q02", "text": "Who or what asserted this about what distinguishes a literary theory, by which method, and when was it true?", "kind": "provenance", "answer_data": [ "authority", "method", "evidence", "event time", "knowledge time" ] }, { "id": "distinguishing-features-q03", "text": "What may an agent decide or do once what distinguishes a literary theory is known, and what must it refuse?", "kind": "action", "answer_data": [ "permitted actions", "preconditions", "refusals", "escalation" ] } ] } ] } ] }, { "id": "state-and-lifecycle", "name": "State and lifecycle", "description": "The states a literary theory passes through and the events that move it between them.", "rationale": "Most decisions about a thing depend on what state it is in now, which is a claim with a time on it, not a property.", "layers": [ { "id": "lifecycle-stages", "name": "Lifecycle stages", "description": "From coming into existence to ceasing to be one of these.", "findings": [ { "id": "stages-and-transitions", "name": "Stages and transitions", "description": "The stages worth naming and what moves a literary theory between them.", "questions": [ { "id": "stages-and-transitions-q01", "text": "What identifies and describes the lifecycle of a literary theory, and in what units or vocabulary?", "kind": "definition", "answer_data": [ "identifiers", "types and classes", "values with units", "explicit unknowns" ] }, { "id": "stages-and-transitions-q02", "text": "Who or what asserted this about the lifecycle of a literary theory, by which method, and when was it true?", "kind": "provenance", "answer_data": [ "authority", "method", "evidence", "event time", "knowledge time" ] }, { "id": "stages-and-transitions-q03", "text": "What may an agent decide or do once the lifecycle of a literary theory is known, and what must it refuse?", "kind": "action", "answer_data": [ "permitted actions", "preconditions", "refusals", "escalation" ] } ] } ] }, { "id": "observations-and-status", "name": "Observations and current status", "description": "What is observed about a literary theory, how often and by whom.", "findings": [ { "id": "observation-record", "name": "Observation record", "description": "How an observation of a literary theory is recorded so that it can be superseded rather than overwritten.", "questions": [ { "id": "observation-record-q01", "text": "What identifies and describes an observation of a literary theory, and in what units or vocabulary?", "kind": "definition", "answer_data": [ "identifiers", "types and classes", "values with units", "explicit unknowns" ] }, { "id": "observation-record-q02", "text": "Who or what asserted this about an observation of a literary theory, by which method, and when was it true?", "kind": "provenance", "answer_data": [ "authority", "method", "evidence", "event time", "knowledge time" ] }, { "id": "observation-record-q03", "text": "What may an agent decide or do once an observation of a literary theory is known, and what must it refuse?", "kind": "action", "answer_data": [ "permitted actions", "preconditions", "refusals", "escalation" ] } ] } ] } ] }, { "id": "content-and-access", "name": "Content, encoding and access", "description": "What a literary theory says, how it is encoded and who may read it.", "rationale": "An informational thing carries content that can be copied, versioned and withheld, none of which its physical carrier explains.", "layers": [ { "id": "content-and-encoding", "name": "Content and encoding", "description": "The content itself, its format and its language.", "findings": [ { "id": "content-and-format", "name": "Content, format and language", "description": "What a literary theory contains and in what form it is held.", "questions": [ { "id": "content-and-format-q01", "text": "What identifies and describes the content of a literary theory, and in what units or vocabulary?", "kind": "definition", "answer_data": [ "identifiers", "types and classes", "values with units", "explicit unknowns" ] }, { "id": "content-and-format-q02", "text": "Who or what asserted this about the content of a literary theory, by which method, and when was it true?", "kind": "provenance", "answer_data": [ "authority", "method", "evidence", "event time", "knowledge time" ] }, { "id": "content-and-format-q03", "text": "What may an agent decide or do once the content of a literary theory is known, and what must it refuse?", "kind": "action", "answer_data": [ "permitted actions", "preconditions", "refusals", "escalation" ] } ] } ] }, { "id": "access-and-rights", "name": "Access, rights and retention", "description": "Who may read, copy or change it, and for how long it is kept.", "findings": [ { "id": "access-rules", "name": "Access rules and retention", "description": "The permissions attached to a literary theory and the period it survives.", "questions": [ { "id": "access-rules-q01", "text": "What identifies and describes access to a literary theory, and in what units or vocabulary?", "kind": "definition", "answer_data": [ "identifiers", "types and classes", "values with units", "explicit unknowns" ] }, { "id": "access-rules-q02", "text": "Who or what asserted this about access to a literary theory, by which method, and when was it true?", "kind": "provenance", "answer_data": [ "authority", "method", "evidence", "event time", "knowledge time" ] }, { "id": "access-rules-q03", "text": "What may an agent decide or do once access to a literary theory is known, and what must it refuse?", "kind": "action", "answer_data": [ "permitted actions", "preconditions", "refusals", "escalation" ] } ] } ] } ] }, { "id": "subject-and-method", "name": "Subject matter and method", "description": "What literary theory studies and how it establishes anything.", "rationale": "A field is identified by its questions and its methods, and those are what distinguish it from the fields next to it.", "layers": [ { "id": "subject", "name": "Subject matter", "description": "The questions it takes as its own.", "findings": [ { "id": "subject-record", "name": "Questions and objects of study", "description": "What it is about, stated so a neighbouring field can be told apart.", "questions": [ { "id": "subject-record-q01", "text": "What questions and objects does literary theory take as its own?", "kind": "definition" }, { "id": "subject-record-q02", "text": "Which questions does it share with a neighbouring field, and who claims them?", "kind": "boundary" } ] } ] }, { "id": "method", "name": "Method and evidence", "description": "How claims are established and what counts as evidence.", "findings": [ { "id": "method-record", "name": "Methods and standards of evidence", "description": "The methods used and what they are taken to establish.", "questions": [ { "id": "method-record-q01", "text": "By what methods does literary theory establish claims, and what counts as sufficient evidence?", "kind": "provenance" }, { "id": "method-record-q02", "text": "What kind of claim can this field not settle, and where should an agent look instead?", "kind": "action" } ] } ] } ] }, { "id": "institutions-and-classification", "name": "Institutions and classification", "description": "Where literary theory is practised and how catalogues place it.", "rationale": "The institutional footprint is the evidence that a field exists as a field rather than as a topic.", "layers": [ { "id": "institutions", "name": "Institutional markers", "description": "Societies, journals, degrees and departments.", "findings": [ { "id": "institution-record", "name": "Bodies and venues", "description": "Where the field organises itself.", "questions": [ { "id": "institution-record-q01", "text": "Which societies, journals or degrees mark literary theory as an established field?", "kind": "provenance" }, { "id": "institution-record-q02", "text": "What would show that it is emerging or dissolving rather than established?", "kind": "boundary" } ] } ] }, { "id": "classification", "name": "Classification schemes", "description": "Where library and research classifications put it.", "findings": [ { "id": "classification-record", "name": "Codes and their disagreements", "description": "The classification codes that place it, and where they differ.", "questions": [ { "id": "classification-record-q01", "text": "Which classification schemes place literary theory, under what codes?", "kind": "definition" }, { "id": "classification-record-q02", "text": "Where do those schemes disagree about its scope?", "kind": "boundary" } ] } ] } ] }, { "id": "provenance-and-evidence", "name": "Provenance, evidence and time", "description": "Where every claim about a literary theory came from and when it held.", "rationale": "A claim without a source and a time cannot be superseded, only overwritten, and an agent that overwrites loses the ability to explain itself.", "layers": [ { "id": "source-and-authority", "name": "Source and authority", "description": "Who said it, on what evidence, and how strongly.", "findings": [ { "id": "claim-provenance", "name": "Claim provenance and confidence", "description": "The authority behind each claim about a literary theory and how confident it is.", "questions": [ { "id": "claim-provenance-q01", "text": "What identifies and describes a claim about a literary theory, and in what units or vocabulary?", "kind": "definition", "answer_data": [ "identifiers", "types and classes", "values with units", "explicit unknowns" ] }, { "id": "claim-provenance-q02", "text": "Who or what asserted this about a claim about a literary theory, by which method, and when was it true?", "kind": "provenance", "answer_data": [ "authority", "method", "evidence", "event time", "knowledge time" ] }, { "id": "claim-provenance-q03", "text": "What may an agent decide or do once a claim about a literary theory is known, and what must it refuse?", "kind": "action", "answer_data": [ "permitted actions", "preconditions", "refusals", "escalation" ] } ] } ] }, { "id": "time-and-versions", "name": "Time, versions and supersession", "description": "When a claim was true, when it was learnt, and what replaced it.", "findings": [ { "id": "validity-and-supersession", "name": "Validity period and supersession", "description": "How an old claim about a literary theory is retired without being erased.", "questions": [ { "id": "validity-and-supersession-q01", "text": "What identifies and describes the validity of a claim about a literary theory, and in what units or vocabulary?", "kind": "definition", "answer_data": [ "identifiers", "types and classes", "values with units", "explicit unknowns" ] }, { "id": "validity-and-supersession-q02", "text": "Who or what asserted this about the validity of a claim about a literary theory, by which method, and when was it true?", "kind": "provenance", "answer_data": [ "authority", "method", "evidence", "event time", "knowledge time" ] }, { "id": "validity-and-supersession-q03", "text": "What may an agent decide or do once the validity of a claim about a literary theory is known, and what must it refuse?", "kind": "action", "answer_data": [ "permitted actions", "preconditions", "refusals", "escalation" ] } ] } ] } ] } ] }, "statistics": { "bundles": 6, "layers": 12, "findings": 14, "questions": 38 } } } }