Lexico-Semantic Field and Conceptual Feature of the Concept "Ақыл/Mind"
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Linguoculturology, a branch of linguistic science, faces challenges in identifying and describing types of cultural concepts. A systematic analysis and a comparative description of the concept "ақыл/mind" in the Kazakh and English languages have not yet been carried out. A comprehensive investigation of the linguoculturological and cognitive specifics of this concept in the linguistic consciousness of Kazakh and English speakers is needed. The current study analysed the lexical and semantic field of the concept "ақыл/mind" and the conceptual specificity of the lexicographic sources of the Kazakh and English languages. Using the logical-semantic method, the study determined the etymology and synonymous fields of the concept "aқыл/mind". The conceptual component of the concept "aқыл/mind" wasanalysed based on lexicographic sources to determine the core and peripheryof each lexeme given its definition given in adictionary entry. The study then illustrated the similarities and peculiarities of the verbalisation of the concept "aқыл/mind" and investigated thedistinctive features of national and cultural characteristics.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.010 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".