THEMATIC GROUPS OF EXOTICISMS IN UKRAINIAN-LANGUAGE MASS MEDIA AND INTERNET DISCOURSE OF THE FIRST QUARTER OF THE 21ST CENTURY
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The article examines several thematic groups of exoticisms that are increasingly permeating the Ukrainian language and enriching its lexical and semantic subsystems. The research was carried out on the material of printed and electronic mass media and Internet discourse (social networks, forums, blogs, chat rooms, guest books, search sites, etc.) of the first quarter of the 21st century. The latter in the mentioned period is a powerful communicative environment in which new uncodified lexical units constantly appear and actively function. Among them, various exoticisms have become the subject of attention. A significant array of such units has been collected and analyzed, the result of the intensification of intercultural communication in the modern, globalized, and informationized world. The main reasons for the intensification of the use of exoticisms in the mentioned discourses have been identified and presented. The article, based on a significant amount of material (over 190 words recorded in mass media and Internet communication from over 30 languages) analyzes in detail the exoticisms of such thematic groups as: designations of dishes and drinks, nominations of catering establishments, names of persons, sports realities and concepts, and nominations of everyday realities. Among the latter, subgroups are distinguished, namely: national costumes of different peoples, exotic headdresses, units for shoe names, words for describing furniture and interiors of various ethnic groups, kitchen utensils, and other utensils. The collected substantial body of illustrative material showed that the exoticisms currently recorded by the author in Ukrainian-language mass media and Internet discourse differ in their sources, numbers, levels of use, etc. We predict that the diffusion of exoticisms into the Ukrainian language will continue to intensify. We consider it promising to further study other groups of exotic vocabulary to denote buildings and their parts, culture and art, customs and rituals, religious realities and concepts, monetary units, etc.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.009 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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 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".