Bibliographic record
Abstract
A quarter of a century after the publication of the collective volume on the Turkic Languages under the editorship of Lars Johanson and Éva Á. Csató (1998), the volume is now available in a second edition, which is both more detailed and more professionally edited than the first one.While the first edition contained 27 chapters by 18 different authors, the second edition has 30 chapters by 21 authors.Of the original authors four have passed away in the meantime, and some others have been replaced by new ones, with nine authors being present for the first time.Even so, some chapters are reprinted in an essentially unaltered form.Among them, there is the general introduction to the "Speakers of the Turkic languages" (Chapter 1) by Hendrik Boeschoten, which, unfortunately, is rather disorganized and, among other things, lacks the table of speaker numbers that was present in the first edition.Of course, as Boeschoten notes, "[t]he exact number of Turkic speaking people living around the world is difficult to estimate", but it is always possible to give a rough estimate.After all, the size of the speaker populations of the various Turkic languages varies from one individual (possibly still for Manchurian Kirghiz) to 80-90 million (Turkish), and it is certainly possible to classify the languages into those spoken by dozens, hundreds, thousands, tens of thousands, hundreds of thousands, millions, and tens of millions.It would also be interesting to list the traditional religions of the different Turkic-speaking ethnicities in table form, as they range from Sunni Islam (e.g.Turks of Turkey) and Shia Islam (e.g.Azerbaijanis) to Tibetan Buddhism (Yellow Uighur, Tyva), Shamanism (many Siberian Turkic groups), Orthodox Christianity (Gagauz
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 | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.023 | 0.022 |
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".