«Non s'introduce alcun vocabolo se il bisogno non se ne fa sentire» : Emmanuele Rocco e la questione dei neologismi nell'Ottocento
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Riassunto : Il «filologo napoletano» Emmanuele Rocco è una figura di un certo rilievo nella cultura linguistica italiana del medio e secondo Ottocento. Giornalista poligrafo e polemista vivace, oltre che lessicografo di prim’ordine, Rocco fu uno dei principali compilatori del Vocabolario universale italiano noto come Tramater e fu autore, tra le altre cose, di una raccolta di diverse migliaia di aggiunte e correzioni alla lessicografia italiana e, soprattutto, di un monumentale dizionario storico del dialetto napoletano, redatto per intero, ma interrotto nella stampa alla voce feletto. Il presente articolo si propone in particolare di delineare le idee e la posizione di Rocco nell’ambito delle discussioni ottocentesche intorno ai neologismi.||Abstract : The «filologo napoletano» Emmanuele Rocco is a figure of some prominence in Italian linguistic culture of the middle and second half of the 19th century. A polygraph journalist and lively polemicist, as well as a first-rate lexicographer, Rocco was one of the main compilers of the Vocabolario universale italiano known as Tramater and was the author, among other things, of a collection of several thousand additions and corrections to Italian lexicography and, above all, of a monumental historical dictionary of Neapolitan, compiled in full but discontinued in print at the entry for feletto. This article aims in particular to outline Rocco’s ideas and position in the context of nineteenth-century discussions around neologisms.
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 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.010 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.001 |
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".