Bibliographic record
Abstract
In her essay titled ‘Thresholds: A Prosody of Citizenship’, Lisa Robertson posits language at the origin and as constitutive of all political subjects. The essay was originally published in Canada in 2012 as ‘Untitled Essay’ in Nilling, and its recent re-print in the UK by Book Woks and The Common Guild for the Dialecty series appears very timely indeed. In her essay Robertson talks of the vernacular as a shared language, learnt not from dictionaries and textbooks but from the subjects co-existence, she describes it as “something which loosely gathers whatever singular words and cadences move a given situation, a given meeting, as it is being lived by its speakers”, thus echoeing Maurice Merleau-Ponty’s work on language in La Prose du monde for instance. The vernacular, Robertson adds, may be characterized, by wit, excess, plasticity, … as well as polylinguality. Curiously Merleau-Ponty remains very evasive on the subject of multilingualism, with one remark in Phénoménologie de la perception explaining that one can only live in one language at a time because one cannot possibly inhabit two worlds simultaneously. \n \nFor this paper I propose a close reading and analysis of Robertson’s essay, through the lens of the bilingual subject, and in particular, of the bilingual subject whose rights as a citizen have been, or might be, withdrawn. This is the situation many Europeans citizen living in the UK are currently facing. This is also something that Jacques Derrida experienced for a duration of three years, when his French citizenship was revoked because of newly implemented administrative rules between France and Algeria. Derrida talks about this in Le Monolinguisme de l’autre, and writes ‘Je n’ai qu’une langue et ce n’est pas la mienne’. \nWhat I would like to explore in this paper and I think is at stake here is not necessarily the tension which might exist between vernacular language and institutionalised language, or langue, but between vernacular political language and institutionalised political rights and the movements that might occur between the two.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.006 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.019 | 0.004 |
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".