The Theme of Food in the Inquiries of the Romanian Linguistic Atlas
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper aims to examine how the theme of food is configured in the corpus of documents collected during the eight years of direct inquiries (1930–1938), carried out by Sever Pop and Emil Petrovici for the Romanian language heritage project, the Romanian Linguistic Atlas. The material on which the research is based, excerpted from the archive of the Romanian Linguistic Atlas, draws on questionnaires, a series of edited maps and dialect texts published or set in manuscript. While the basic food field is well represented in the RLA questionnaires, covering dairy products, meat and meat products, fruits, vegetables, spices, canned food, wine, brandy, vinegar, etc., the dialect texts cover only a small segment of this field. In terms of numbers, 61 texts documenting traditional food in the inter-war period have been identified. Most of them describe the production processes of sheep's/cow's milk products (cheese, curd, curd, butter, butter, etc.), fermented products (vinegar) and alcoholic beverages (wine and brandy/juice). A smaller number of texts, provided by women, describe some of the products that are part of the staple diet (bread, cornmeal, alivenci (traditional custard tart) or ritual food (coliva). The linguistic documents in the archive of the Romanian Linguistic Atlas on the subject of traditional food provide, on the one hand, an opportunity to delimit the regional specificity of certain dishes on the basis of terminology, through the terms recorded in the atlas maps, and, on the other hand, through the texts that are comparable from one survey point to another, reveal the relationship between the geographical area and the cultural specificity of a region. The uneven documentation of some categories of local food products in the surveys of the Romanian Linguistic Atlas must be correlated with the typology of the informant (male, aged between 40 and 60, illiterate, mainly engaged in agriculture and animal breeding), but also with the purpose and role of these surveys, which is to spot the linguistic change in a limited time by capturing the linguistic particularities of a language, from the phonetic, morphophonological, syntactic and lexical point of view.
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 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
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".