Search papers, labs, and topics across Lattice.
To evaluate how abstract stylistic constraints alter long-form generation, this study analyzes 100 full-length novels produced by GPT, Qwen, and Llama workflows under "Victorian" versus style-neutral prompt conditions. Using a grammatical Period Alignment Score (PAS) that isolates syntactic features from topical semantics, the author finds that historical tags successfully shift GPT and Qwen toward 19th-century syntax via a shared direction of grammatical change, while Llama fails to show robust alignment. Crucially, this steering targets coarse, century-level grammatical priors rather than fine-grained, period-specific Victorian prose.
Prompting LLMs with historical period tags steers grammar toward century-scale approximations in GPT and Qwen while failing entirely in Llama, revealing that models internalize historical style as coarse temporal heuristics rather than distinct period representations.
Generative AI inverts the typical periodization of literary history: the periodizing tag Victorian can now come first and influence what is written. Generative periodization, defined and tested here, describes the use of literary-period designations in generating texts. I test this approach on 100 book-length novels produced under Victorian and Zero-Style conditions using GPT, Qwen, and Llama workflows. The Period Alignment Score (PAS), trained on nineteenth-century literature and benchmarked against human Zero-Style prose, assesses alignment using topic-reduced grammatical features. Victorian prompts produce consistent historical-direction shifts in GPT and Qwen, but not robustly in Llama. Victorian-only recalibration and harder comparison corpora preserve the GPT and Qwen effects. Cross-model transfer also shows a shared direction of grammatical change. The measurable target is the broader nineteenth century rather than the Victorian period per se.
