Becoming European: Strangers Finding a Place in the European Union
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This article addresses the idea of belonging in Europe from the perspective of postcolonial migrants settling in EU societies. It draws on over one hundred in-depth interviews with Algerian, Ecuadorian, and Indian individuals settled mainly in and around the cities of London, Madrid, and Paris. Rather than investigating migrants’ orientations to Europe through a narrow interest in self-identification (feeling vs. not feeling European), it delves into individual migration narratives for evidence of how Europe is imagined (if it is imagined at all) during the migration process and its relation to other physical and symbolic sites. As a frame for interpreting individual migration narratives, I introduce the concept of ‘migratory rupture’, a dialectical experience of both the disorienting and creative aspects of migration. In excavating some of the reflexive processes involved in constructing symbolic geographies of attachment, I find that regardless of the scales of comparison used to articulate place affiliation across different contexts, e.g. whether small-scale (neighbourhoods or city districts) or larger-scale (supranational or de-territorialized categories), symbolic geographies allow migrants to view their transnational life experience on a single, coherent plane and express a form of global consciousness.
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 | 0.006 | 0.012 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.023 | 0.019 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.015 | 0.010 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.011 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".