Prompt engineering holds the promise for the computational literary studies (CLS) to obtain high quality markup for literary research questions by simply prompting large language models with natural language strings. We test prompt engineering’s validity for two CLS sequence labeling tasks under the following aspects: (i) how generalizable are the results of identical prompts on different dataset splits?, (ii) how robust are performance results when re-formulating the prompts?, and (iii) how generalizable are certain fixed phrases added to the prompts that are generally considered to increase performance. We find that results are sensitive to data splits and prompt formulation, while the addition of fixed phrases does not change performance in most cases, depending on the chosen model.

In this paper, we evaluate two different natural language processing (NLP) approaches to solve a paradigmatic task for computational literary studies (CLS): the recognition of knowledge transfer in literary texts. We focus on the question of how adequately large language models capture the transfer of knowledge about family relations in German drama texts when this transfer is treated as a classification or textual entailment task using in-context learning (ICL). We find that a 13 billion parameter LLAMA 2 model performs best on the former, while GPT-4 performs best on the latter task. However, all models achieve relatively low scores compared to standard NLP benchmark results, struggle from inconsistencies with small changes in prompts and are often not able to make simple inferences beyond the textual surface, which is why an unreflected generic use of ICL in the CLS seems still not advisable.