DYNAMICS OF CULTURAL SYMBOLIZATION: FROM PLACES OF MEMORY TO PLACES OF TRANSITION (ON THE EXAMPLE OF FRENCH-LANGUAGE SCIENTIFIC DISCOURSES)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The article discusses the terminology of cultural memory research - the designations of reference points and/or vectors of culture that are important for the identification of a person and a collective. It is shown that the symbolization of culture can occur in different forms: the author examines the nominations that are used in the French-language scientific literature when developing the concepts of places (lieux): places of memory, places of knowledge, not places, places of transition. Most of the names with the place component are still close to metaphors and are not well known to the Russian-speaking audience. The article aims to trace the evolution of a number of designations proposed by the French-speaking authors of the second half of the XX-XXI centuries within the framework of theories of places of culture that can find wider application in domestic science. Based on the material of France and Quebec, it is established that in the French-speaking scientific discourse, the reference points of culture can be associated with the symbolism of places and reflect two sides of the existence of culture itself: static and dynamic. These sides are mutually reversible: in the process of the development of culture and language, new references arise, while “old” references are stored in memory, forgotten and resurface, revised and processed. The interchange and reinterpretation of old and new reference points, places of memory and places of transition are a sign and condition for the development of society, culture and discourses about society and culture at different stages of history.
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 | 0.012 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.005 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.015 | 0.052 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.017 | 0.014 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.006 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| 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".