Formal classification establishes authorial voice typology in literature, indicating deeper understanding of authorship.
EA-PKG-02 v1.0 — Formal classification of authorial voices in Pessoa and beyond. Companion to EA-PKG-01: The Pessoa Knowledge Graph. This document formalizes the typology of authorial voices operative in Fernando Pessoa's heteronymic system and offers an extension adequate to contemporary heteronymic practice and knowledge-graph representation. Pessoa himself articulated, in his 13 January 1935 letter to Adolfo Casais Monteiro, the distinction among orthonym, heteronym, and semi-heteronym. Teresa Rita Lopes and subsequent critics extended the typology with proto-heteronym and para-heteronym. This document consolidates these as graphically distinct classes, offers operational criteria for classifying ambiguous figures, and introduces contemporary extensions accommodating post-Pessoa heteronymic practice without collapsing the typological distinctions. Six principal categories are formalized: Orthonym (ortónimo / ortônimo) — author's own name as literary voice Heteronym (heterónimo / heterônimo) — fully independent authorial figure Semi-heteronym (semi-heterónimo) — partially differentiated voice Proto-heteronym (pré-heterónimo / proto-heterónimo) — precursor figure, typically early Para-heteronym (para-heterónimo) — second-order system figure Pseudonym (pseudónimo) — name substitution, biographical writer The typology is tested against pre-Pessoan (Kierkegaard), parallel (Machado), and downstream (Borges, Saramago, Yeats) cases, and extended with a tentative new category — cross-substrate heteronym — for contemporary AI-era practice (developed fully in EA-PKG-03). Graph-level encoding via Wikidata instance of (P31) classes is specified. Dual pt-br/en abstracts included. CC BY 4.0. Part of the Pessoa Knowledge Graph project foundation deposits. ∮ = 1
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Lee Sharks (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: