Bibliographic record
Abstract
French Abstract: Le mot «souverainete» procure un exemple fort de l'effet semiologique du langage ,c'est-a-dire de son pouvoir social dans le processus continu et continuel de creation de la realite humaine. Le texte propose d'examiner ce signe linguistique a l'epoque de son introduction par Bodin, au 16ieme siecle, mettant en lumiere son impact social sur la conscience commune de l'humanite, et ce, en adoptant une approche qui s'inspire de la deconstruction de Derrida. Ainsi, tout en considerant l'oeuvre dans son contexte immediat et elargi, une analyse deconstructioniste de Six Livres de la Republique demontre que, au moyen du mot`souverainete, Bodin voulait placer le Roi de France au sommet d'une structure hierarchique de pouvoir unique. Cette idee de pyramide d'autorite ressort clairement du discours dans lequel se trouve le signe linguistique, qui met en jeu l'opposition``plus-haut-pouvoir-unifie'' versus``pouvoir-decentralise-subordonne.'' Depuis ce temps, le mot `souverainete' n'a cesse d'avoir un pouvoir semiologique considerable sur la conscience commune des societes, incluant evidemment celle de la societe internationale. English Abstract: The word sovereignty provides a strong example of the semiological effect of language, that is, of its social power in the continuous and continuous process of the creation of human reality. The paper proposes a linguistic examination at the time of its introduction by Bodin in the 16th century, highlighting its social impact on the common consciousness of mankind by adopting an approach inspired by the deconstruction of Derrida. Thus, while considering the work in its immediate and enlarged context, a deconstructionist analysis of the Six Books of the Republic shows that, by means of logistics, Bodin wanted to place the King of France at the top of a hierarchical structure of Power unique. This idea of a pyramid of authority emerges clearly from discourse in the place where the linguistic sign is found, which encountered the more-high-power-unified versus decentralized-subordinate-opposition. Since that time, the word 'sovereignty' has not ceased to have a considerable semiotic power over the common consciousness of societies, including international society.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.009 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.016 | 0.002 |
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".