REIMAGINING NEOLIBERALISM, GLOBALIZATION, LITERATURE AND LANGUAGE EDUCATION: AN INTERVIEW WITH PROF. DR. DIANA BRYDON / Reimaginando o neoliberalismo, a globalização, a literatura e a educação linguística: uma entrevista com Prof. Dr. Diana Brydon
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this interview, Dr. Brydon insightfully discusses contemporary keywords such as neoliberalism and globalization and how they intersect with literary studies and language education. She also talks about the transnational literacies projects developed between Canada and Brazil along the past ten years. Dr. Brydon also discusses the dichotomy between literature and language/linguistic studies by suggesting the reimagination of both fields. In the case of literature, she introduces speculative literature as a possibility to (re)imagine “horrific dystopian worlds” – on one hand, and a “world where people value negotiation, compromise, and solutions that may not be ideal to any of the partners but that are livable for all of us” – on the other.
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 | 0.014 | 0.010 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.019 | 0.018 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.010 | 0.010 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.008 |
| Research integrity | 0.005 | 0.018 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 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".