Semiotics in Political Discourse. An Analytical Treatment of Political Text Criticisms Since 2003: The Case of the Discourse of Prime Minister Nouri Al-Maliki
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This article discusses the function of semiotics in political discourse after the socio-political processes taking place in Iraq since 2003 and its role in the development of textual criticisms of some Iraqi politicians, analyzes the reasons for its functioning in the speech of politicians. The research is mainly focused on finding out to what extent political text studies draw on sign systems that can store and transmit information, the nature of its purpose and the use of available fields for the purpose to be achieved. The chief purpose of the study is to investigate and also clarify the symbols and signs appear within the framework of discursive Iraqi politicians, the nature of the symbols used, and the meanings that are included in the discourse in terms of structure, context, and form. Moreover, it has been attempted to define semiotic features in the texts of Iraqi politicians; and elicit structure, style and wording, and the degree of convergence of meaning and form in the semiotic application.
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 | 0.008 | 0.010 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.006 | 0.007 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.014 | 0.042 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.013 | 0.008 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".