Multiculturalism in names of restaurants in Baia Mare
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The social and linguistic profile of Romania after 1989 has been increasingly multicultural. This phenomenon does not only occur in specific states. Definite and defining intrusions of other cultures in various countries in Europe and on other continents are diagnostic of the existential shape of humankind in the third millennium. The trend has altered all the social sectors in which it became manifest, transforming even, or especially, the level of language. One could claim, without it being an overstatement, that all the speakers of a nation or most of them use an “impure” language, as they “stain” the given historical language with lexical “intruders” without which communication would be suspended. To be a valid speaker of the new millennium one should think, speak and behave multiculturally. We are corporate employees of words, the interface between the conservation of locality and the expansion of multitasking. We behave like citizens of the cyberspace not only when working on online platforms, but also in our day-to‑day existence, which proves that we are three-dimensional individuals. This paper aims at observing and quantifying (qualitatively and quantitatively) the extent to which multiculturalism has infiltrated a certain field of material life in Baia Mare on the onomastic level, i.e. restaurants, as outlets for assumedly gourmet food. The article explores whether one can talk about pure onymic multiculturalism (determining the degree of coexistence of lexical oppositions) or whether the national avatar was eliminated and the borrowed element in the name has been established unequivocally (the novel element). The author uses the methodology specific to linguistics, onomastics and cultural studies.
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.006 | 0.005 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".