MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2971181455 · doi:10.5539/jpl.v12n5p57

Verbal Politeness as an Important Tool of Diplomacy

2019· article· en· W2971181455 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Politics and Law · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicLanguage, Communication, and Linguistic Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCourtesyEtiquettePolitenessDiplomacyPoliticsLawNeutralitySociologyPolitical sciencePower (physics)Foreign policyLinguisticsPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article examines the notion of diplomatic courtesy and analyzes the ways of its language expression in Russian diplomatic discourse on the example of the speeches delivered by the Minister of Foreign Affairs of the Russian Federation Sergey Lavrov. Diplomatic courtesy is considered by the authors as an integral part of the diplomatic language, which, being a component of the official business style, is characterized by standardization, normalization, lack of emotionality and neutrality. At the same time, the diplomatic language allows the use of language means that are not regulated by the diplomatic protocol, which act as euphemisms and allow expressing opinions on acute political problems without violating the existing rules of diplomatic communication. The success of diplomatic communication is achieved with the help of universal speech formulas that serve as a means of manifesting courtesy and correspond to the standards of diplomatic communication. Such speech formulas themselves do not have legal force, but they have great moral and political power, since they contribute to the regulation of the nature of relations between countries. The article shows that diplomatic courtesy can be both positive and negative. The degree of courtesy in a diplomat's speech may depend on a wide range of various factors conditioned by the dependence of diplomatic etiquette on the specifics of interaction between communicants. Based on the results of the conducted research, the authors came to the conclusion that during various meetings the Minister of Foreign Affairs uses the following verbal means - speech formulas of greeting, address, compliment, invitation, gratitude, condolence, farewell. The frequency of such speech formulas is explained by the need of abidance of an international protocol that prescribes to diplomatic staff a certain sequence of verbal and non-verbal actions.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.493
Threshold uncertainty score0.969

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.017
GPT teacher head0.344
Teacher spread0.327 · 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