Personological Creation of Language: The Feminist Perspective
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This research stems from Helene Cixous's call for women to invent their language – the language of feminism – by interpreting their identities as a science of feminine creation. This science is a protest of women's subjugation and exploitation using symbolic language to question male supremacy. Thus, this research investigates sexual differentiation as related to language differentiation between men and women. This investigation aims to develop standards and deploy a feminist-specific language known as l’ecriture feminine. Significantly, the argument seeks to challenge masculine realities, judgments and perspectives manifested in language deployment. A creative writing-based methodology is used, and the primary author is Akachi Adimora-Ezeigbo, together with other relevant authors and feminist critics who have demonstrated in their works, women's patterns of reasoning and language. The goal is to create a language of feminism that is a conscious effort to erase or contrast the language of patriarchal imaginary order, which is fundamental in language codification. Consequently, female and male writers who share this position are encouraged to develop and rewrite popular narratives to establish the language of feminism as a field of exploration and use in the modern world.
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 | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.007 | 0.059 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.009 | 0.008 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| 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".