Bibliographic record
Abstract
There is no concept “I” that incorporates all the I 's that are uttered at every moment in the mouths of all speakers…Then, what does I refer to? To something very peculiar which is exclusively linguistic: I refers to the act of individual discourse in which it is pronounced, and by this it designates the speaker…And so it is literally true that the basis of subjectivity is in the exercise of language. Benveniste 1971: 226 I am lying. TROPES OF SUBJECTIVITY The courtroom speech tells a life story, a logos biou . Litigants relate glowing autobiographies of their own lives and vicious exposés of the lives of their opponents. A vision of the subject is always implicit in juridical discourse, and subjective strategies are a vital means by which that discourse produces and secures legal meaning. But what kind of story is law's logos biou and what kind of life does it narrate? Legal theorists who put these questions to modern law often conclude that legal discourse in general is unable to embrace a complex subject, whether it is the subject of psychoanalysis, with its unconscious motivations and ambivalent desires, or the decentered and ontologically divided subject of postmodernism. These scholars argue (with various attitudes of regret or approbation) that law both assumes and requires as its ideal subject a unified and unitary, autonomous and rational individual, the conscious initiator of intentional action and the identifiable bearer of legal rights.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.007 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.016 | 0.004 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".