Human beings and other people: Classification of human groups and categories among the Nage of Flores (eastern Indonesia)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Speakers of a Central-Malayo-Polynesian language, the Nage of central Flores possess three terms for ‘person, people’ and ‘human being’: ata, hoga, and kita ata. The paper explores various semantic and social contexts in which the terms are differentially employed. Further discussed are lexical connections and semantic parallels with terms in other Malayo-Polynesian languages and the way these bear on the referents of Austronesian protoforms. Particular attention is given to Blust’s reconstruction of *qa(R)(CtT)a (reflected by Nage ata) as a word hypothetically specifying ‘outsiders, alien people’. With reference to Nage and other languages of Flores, it is shown how, rather than a simple contrast of outsiders and own group, ata and hoga are employed to express a variety of kinds and degrees of association or disassociation between speaker and referent. In this connection further attention is given to: (1) the question of whether Nage terms for humans and compounds formed from these compose a taxonomy comparable to the taxonomic ordering of plants and animals commonly found in folk biological classifications, and (2) the relation between the terms denoting human beings and Nage categories translatable as ‘(non-human) animal’ and ‘spiritual being’.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
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".