Topoi y legitimación de las políticas de austeridad. Un estudio de los editoriales de La Presse desde 1980 hasta 2015
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Este articulo estudia la difusion de los topoi de una vulgata neoliberal mediante un analisis discursivo longitudinal, desde 1980 hasta 2015, de los editoriales de La Presse, uno de los principales periodicos de Quebec. El analisis tematico, argumentativo, pragmatico y enunciativo de este corpus se realiza en relacion con las teorias economicas presentes en los enunciados de los editoriales. Pues, aunque los lugares comunes (topoi) desarrollados o movilizados en La Presse simplifican en extremo estas teorias, las relaciones entre los dos niveles de circulacion son constitutivos de reglas de dispersion del acontecimiento discursivo de la austeridad. Este estudio muestra como la construccion de un topos anti-deficits durante los anos 1980 echa por tierra inmediatamente (sin necesidad de argumentacion) cualquier politica que implique gasto publico. Al estudiar como este topos se adapta a las distintas coyunturas generando y articulando otros topoi de la austeridad, el analisis muestra las «condiciones de posibilidad» de una austeridad permanente, que legitima entre otras cuestiones la criminalizacion de la huelga y la normalizacion de leyes de excepcion que fijan las condiciones de trabajo de los asalariados.
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 | 0.027 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.006 | 0.006 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.008 | 0.008 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.014 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.010 | 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".