Linguocultural codes: development and functioning of the French military honorific system
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The article deals with the historical development and modern functioning of the French military honorific system and military honorifics as components of this system. It reveals the features of their formation and evolution in the context of sociocultural and historical factors, clarifies the forms of the main abbreviations, and describes typical cases of their use. The aim of the article is to generalise the rules of using correct military honorifics in French linguistic culture in situations of official communication. The research material included texts of business letters, documents from official governmental military websites in France, Switzerland, Belgium and Canada, and fragments of French media texts containing military honorifics. The main method of the study was the structural method, which led to the use of distributional and component analyses. The use of military honorifics is mandatory in the military sphere, since the military honorific reflects official relations and ensures hierarchy and subordination in professional communication. The research reveals that the communicative purpose determines the use of the corresponding honorifics and their abbreviated forms. The emphasis is placed on the importance of military ranks as an important element of the linguistic worldview of French society and their role in maintaining military ethics and discipline. Besides, particular attention is paid to the formation and functioning of feminine forms for military ranks and positions. Prospects for further research are outlined in the field of socially marked vocabulary, particularly the functioning of professional French honorific system in cross-cultural communication.
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 | 0.003 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.010 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".