Pejorative Connotation of Proverbs and Sayings with Zoonym in the Russian, German and Tatar Languages
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The problem of the interaction of language and culture is of interest to many scientists nowadays. Proverbs and sayings are units which contain bits of folk wisdom, values and beliefs of the nation. One of the ways to study a culture is to analyze its proverbs and sayings. The aim of the study was to compare paremiological units, namely proverbs and sayings, with zoonym components of three typologically unrelated languages: Russian, German and Tatar. The article deals with proverbs and sayings with the names of domestic animals only. In the study we used such methods as descriptive, structural, interpretative, continuous sampling method and statistical method. The analysis of the selected material revealed 847 Russian, 386 German and Tatar 1634 proverbs and sayings with the domestic animal components, 20 zoonyms in total, including names of birds. The study showed that paremiological units with the names of domestic animals in some cases carry the same connotative semes, mostly pejorative, in all three languages. However, the same component of proverbs in a particular language may have the opposite meaning depending on the speech situation. Such pejorative connotative semes as [stupidity, ignorance], [idleness, laziness], [cowardice], [greed] and etc. were revealed in numerous Russian, German and Tatar proverbs and sayings. The materials of the study may be used in cultural linguistics, cognitive linguistics, cultural studies and phraseology.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it