MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4389804711 · doi:10.29173/comp87

Utilising Mythopoetic Paradigms for Subverting Prescriptive Linguistic Colonial Supremacies

2023· article· en· W4389804711 on OpenAlexafffundvenue
Elliot Goodell Ugalde

Bibliographic record

VenueCOMPASS · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicIndigenous Cultures and Socio-Education
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
FundersMcMaster University
KeywordsColonialismIndigenousNarrativeLinguisticsConstructiveSociologyHistoryComputer scienceProcess (computing)Philosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Post-colonial scholars often confront the dual nature of colonial languages. While these languages provide pivotal communication avenues, especially for diverse marginalized groups like certain Indigenous communities, they simultaneously embody colonial biases, making them challenging mediums for emancipatory discourse. This paper proposes mythopoeticism to leverage the extensive reach of such languages, circumventing their constructive norms. We spotlight this through the prism of the Chiapas Mesoamerican communities' mythopoetics during the 1994 National Army of Zapatista Liberation (EZLN) uprising. This investigation aims to enrich contemporary post-colonial thought, presenting Mesoamerican perspectives on mythopoetics as a dynamic instrument for post-colonial dialogue. The discussion first examines the formative influence of colonial languages on meaning and power dynamics. It then transitions to a detailed textual analysis of the Zapatista mythopoetic narratives. Lastly, it considers the assimilation of Mesoamerican insights into current post-colonial frameworks, endorsing mythopoetics as a rejuvenated mechanism for post-colonial endeavors.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.007
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.035

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0060.062
Scholarly communication0.0080.007
Open science0.0010.007
Research integrity0.0010.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.055
GPT teacher head0.374
Teacher spread0.319 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2023
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCOMPASSSame topicIndigenous Cultures and Socio-EducationFrench-language works237,207