Ladini, Gagauzi, Tatari di Crimea - Tre casi di tutela delle minoranze etnico-linguistiche
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Il seguente lavoro tratta di tutela delle minoranze etnico-linguistiche analizzando tre situazioni specifiche: quella dei ladini nel nord Italia, dei gagauzi in Moldavia e dei tatari di Crimea. In un mondo sempre più globalizzato, dove da un lato si manifestano spinte verso l’omologazione culturale e dall’altro riemergono tendenze nazionaliste che si credevano ormai superate, occuparsi di minoranze e dei mezzi disponibili per garantirne i diritti diviene di importanza fondamentale. Coerentemente con questo assunto, nella prima parte del lavoro vengono messi in evidenza gli strumenti giuridici per la tutela delle minoranze etno-linguistiche approntati a partire dalla seconda guerra mondiale da organismi internazionali ed europei. Nella seconda parte invece vengono esposti i tre casi specifici, con riferimenti alla consistenza, alla localizzazione, alla lingua e alla storia della minoranza di volta in volta trattata, seguiti contestualmente da un’analisi degli strumenti normativi predisposti dagli Stati che le ospitano nel proprio territorio. Vengono inoltre specificati i risultati raggiunti nell’applicazione delle normative e i possibili margini di miglioramento, con l’auspicio che possano essere di esempio e stimolo per gli interventi in questo ambito. Nell’appendice vengono riportate interviste realizzate in loco con rappresentanti delle minoranze oggetto di studio. The following dissertation addresses the topic of the ethnic-linguistic minorities right protection by analyzing three specific situations: that of the Ladins in northern Italy, that of the Gagauz in the Republic of Moldova and that of the Crimean Tatars. In an increasingly globalized world, where on the one hand pushes towards cultural homologation arise and on the other nationalist tendencies that were believed to be outdated emerge, it’s essential to deal with minorities and the means available to guarantee their rights. Consistent with this assumption, in the first part of this thesis the international and European instruments developed after the Second World War for the protection of ethnic-linguistic minorities are highlighted. In the second part the three case studies are presented, with references to the consistency, location, language and history of the minority treated on a case-by-case basis, followed by an analysis of the regulatory instruments provided by the state hosting the minority. Successes achieved and possible room for improvement are also specified, with the hope that they can be an example and a stimulus for interventions in this field. The appendix contains interviews carried out on the spot with representatives of the minorities under study.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 it