Political Discourses at the Extremes : Expressions of Populism in Romance Speaking Countries
Bibliographic record
Abstract
"The authors of this edited volume focus on the emergence of populist discourses, coming from movements or parties from Romance-speaking countries in Europe and in Latin America. By combining linguistics, social and political sciences in a discourse analytical approach, the sixteen papers enlighten the mechanisms behind populist discourses yielding from different socio-cultural and political contexts. The common denominator of the studies is the focus on the discursive and rhetorical characteristics of recently emerged movements of populism in both continents. Investigating expressions of these political movements is highly relevant in today’s society, where the growing number of populist discourses has become a pre-eminent issue, alongside people’s increasing insecurity regarding future political and environmental challenges. The primary audience of this volume are researchers working in the fields of political discourse analysis; however, this book may benefit anybody with interest in language in politics. \n******* \n‘This volume will be a valuable contribution to the study of populist discourse at the political extremes. It hardly needs to be mentioned that this is one of the most topical issues in political discourse throughout the world today. The specifics of populist discourse are often misunderstood, so I have found this volume enlightening and helpful to increasing my own understanding.’ — Rodney Williamson, University of Ottawa \n‘The anthology provides indeed a fine analysis of discourses connected to different socio-cultural and political contexts […] Since it brings together researchers specialized in media and political discourse analysis, it contributes to a large extent to promote a deeper understanding of current political discourses and extremist ideologies.’ — Ana Pano Alamán, University of Bologna" \n
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 | 0.005 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.014 | 0.027 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.015 | 0.009 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.009 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.007 |
| 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".