«Noi siamo tanti schiavi delle altre nazioni» : la percezione dei neologismi nel dibattito sulla lingua italiano dal giornalismo spettatoriale settecentesco al blog nell'era digitale
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Riassunto : Il dibattito sulla lingua è stato particolarmente animato dal tema dei neologismi e prestiti. Se da un lato le parole nuove sono state percepite come risorse per migliorare le capacità espressive, dall’altro hanno anche provocato reazioni allarmistiche verso la lingua italiana, al punto da venire considerate tra le cause della sua decadenza. I mezzi di comunicazione di massa, offrendosi come piattaforme per la diffusione e lo scambio di opinioni, sono stati gli spazi principali in cui si sono svolti tali dibattiti (Schwarze, 2021: 12). Il contributo ha lo scopo di indagare la continuità nella percezione dei neologismi - italiani e stranieri - fra i periodici di tipo spettatoriale pubblicati nel lungo Settecento e i blog del XXI secolo. L’analisi verterà sulla ricorrenza di alcuni campi metaforici e sull’individuazione delle ideologie linguistiche che emergono dalle discussioni.||Abstract : The language debate has been particularly animated by the topic of neologisms and borrowings. While on one hand new words have been perceived as resources to enhance expressive capabilities, on the other hand they have also triggered alarmist reactions towards the Italian language, to the extent of being considered among the causes of its decline. As platforms for the dissemination and exchange of opinions, mass media have been the primary venues where such debates have taken place (Schwarze, 2021: 12). This contribution aims to investigate the continuity in the perception of neologisms - both Italian and foreign - between the Spectator-type periodicals published throughout the long 18th century and the 21st-century blogs. The analysis will focus on the recurrence of some metaphorical fields and on the identification of the linguistic ideologies that emerge from the discussions.
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.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.002 |
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 it