Uma perspectiva enunciativa das relações entre linguagem e memoria no campo da neurolinguistica
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Ancorada em uma perspectiva socio-cultural da cognicao humana, procuro mostrar que as relacoes de solidariedade existentes entre linguagem e memoria se constituem por um feixe de processos integrados: cognitivos, biologicos, culturais e linguisticos. Dessa forma, a reflexao sobre a memoria exige o reconhecimento de relacoes que extrapolam a dimensao cortical ou cognitiva a ela tradicionalmente reservadas. Nesta Dissertacao, a analise de diferentes circunstâncias enunciativo-discursivas, como as tradicionais avaliacoes neuropsicologicas baseadas em testes-padrao, alguns relatos de medicos sobre seus pacientes com alteracoes de linguagem e de memoria e situacoes interlocutivas com sujeitos com afasia e neurodegenerescencia evidenciou os diferentes modos de investigar, relacionar e conceber as relacoes entre linguagem e memoria. A contraposicao dessas distintas circunstâncias enunciativo-discursivas nos permite salientar que a natureza e os modos de existencia e de funcionamento das relacoes entre linguagem e memoria estao na dependencia de varios processos de significacao. Estao, portanto, na dependencia de nossas praticas com linguagem. Abstract
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 | 0.003 | 0.010 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.020 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.009 | 0.009 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 0.001 |
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.
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".