Particularities of Political Vocabulary in Tatar and Mari Mass Media: Synchronic and Diachronic Analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Politics, like any other social sphere, is served by a distinct system of lexical resources, namely—political vocabulary. The article examines semantical and structural organisation of political vocabulary in two languages —Tatar and Mari—both from a historical perspective and at the present stage of their development. Lexico-semantic groups expressing the concepts of “power” and “politician” are thoroughly explored. The following dominant ways of political vocabulary formation are identified: morphological, morpho-syntactic, lexico-grammatical and phono-morphological. Political lexemes deriving from Altai, Turkic and Tatar strata are investigated. Borrowings in the political vocabulary are carefully examined, data drawn from the leading Tatar- and Mari-medium newspapers. The article also covers a study of functioning of the political vocabulary related to the concepts of “power” and “politician”, such as: state / country, government, political party / movement, heads of state departments, elections.
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 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 | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".