MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2972524756 · doi:10.5539/ijel.v9n5p392

Ascertaining the Discursive Construction of the Cosmopolitan Identity: An Analysis of Bharati Mukherjee’s Jasmine

2019· article· en· W2972524756 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Zia Ullah, Wajid Hussain, Anayat Ullah

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of English Linguistics · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicGlobalization and Cultural Identity
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCosmopolitanismSociologyHarmony (color)Identity (music)NaturalizationGlobalizationAestheticsSocial scienceGender studiesLawPolitical sciencePhilosophyArtPolitics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper anatomizes Bharati Mukherjee’s Jasmine in the perspective of cultural assimilation and determines the extent of establishing cosmopolitan identity through discourse. The researcher uses the theoretical framework propounded by Appiah to examine the contribution and representation of literary globalization in the making of ‘universal citizen’ whose cultural and geographical boundary crossing results into the formation of post-modern fluid identities. Methodologically, this qualitative content analysis uses the joint venture of Appiah’s concept of cosmopolitanism and Fairclough’s notion of naturalization focusing on three scenarios which specify an acceptance of differences, accentuation of differences, and attempt to resolve the differences. The analysis reflects that boundary crossing by the immigrants has formed fluidity and has given exponential boost to the idea of harmony and coexistence. It also reveals that this transformation of identity owes to the discourse of the dominant culture which reshapes fundamental knowledge and values for the individuals of minorities. However, it also signifies that postmodern cosmopolitan fluidity continues to thrive.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.014
Threshold uncertainty score0.032

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0040.004
Science and technology studies0.0140.023
Scholarly communication0.0060.004
Open science0.0010.007
Research integrity0.0010.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.338
Teacher spread0.322 · 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 designQualitative
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 venueInternational Journal of English LinguisticsSame topicGlobalization and Cultural IdentityFrench-language works237,207