New Developments in English for Special Purposes (ESP) Lexicology and Lexicography
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The fact that languages are living organisms that evolve and vary as a result of different factors, including societal vicissitudes, cultural influences, technological advancements, migration and intercultural communication, among others, requires a continued effort to identify, characterize and represent the new lexical forms and meanings that emerge in various contexts and domains. Lexicologists and lexicographers thus need to always take on new challenges in their attempt to adequately describe and map our ever-changing language landscapes. Not only does everyday language change but also languages for special purposes (LSP) are subject to variation. On the one hand, new terms and senses are incorporated into already existing lexicons, while, on the other hand, micro-languages with a rich variety of novel lexical items keep appearing. Some cases in point are ecotourism discourse which has been accelerated by recent greater awareness of the impact of human activities on the environment (Penz & Fill, 2022); the language of digital technology, now that societies and technologies have become increasingly interconnected (Würschinger, 2021); certain medical talk, as a consequence of the coronavirus pandemic (Salazar & Wild, 2022), to mention just a few areas of lexical innovation.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.208 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".