MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2100774864 · doi:10.1344/afel2012.2.5

El impacto sociopolítico del discurso de líderes sordos en Argentina

2019· article· es· W2100774864 on OpenAlexaff
María Ignacia Massone, Rocío Martínez, María Rosa Druetta, Pablo P. Lemmo

Bibliographic record

VenueAnuari de Filologia Estudis de Lingüística · 2019
Typearticle
Languagees
FieldPsychology
TopicHearing Impairment and Communication
Canadian institutionsIntertek (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesPersonaPolitical sciencePhilosophySociology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Actualmente, la Argentina es el escenario del impacto sociopolítico del discurso político de los líderes Sordos. Desde los 90, en el medio de una de las más dramáticas crisis económicas, los excluidos luchan por encontrar nuevas identidades, y así el discurso político Sordo (DPS) emerge. El discurso de las ciencias sociales y sus prácticas llevan a la legitimación de la Lengua de Señas Argentina (LSA) y los lingüistas funcionamos como investigadores orgánicos. Las personas Sordas empiezan a convertirse en letrados a través del uso de las nuevas tecnologías y fuera de la escuela formal. El propósito de este trabajo es analizar la jerarquización de la información desde la Lingüística Funcional y el Análisis del Discurso en un corpus recolectado en el 2007. El análisis de los temas y los remas mostrará los objetivos y los contenidos que el DPS tira en la arena de la lucha sociopolítica. Hipotetizamos la existencia del Tema del Evento y Rema del Evento que pertenecen a la práctica discursiva que actúa dialécticamente –en términos lacanianos– con la práctica social. Estos dos discursos, líderes Sordos y lingüística, generan una tensión intertextual que intenta fragmentar al discurso dominante.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.177
Threshold uncertainty score0.352

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.004
Science and technology studies0.0040.003
Scholarly communication0.0040.002
Open science0.0000.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.019
GPT teacher head0.354
Teacher spread0.335 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAnuari de Filologia Estudis de LingüísticaSame topicHearing Impairment and CommunicationFrench-language works237,207