Algorithmic power and scientific knowledge

Inês Signorini
{"title":"Algorithmic power and scientific knowledge","authors":"Inês Signorini","doi":"10.1075/lcs.00044.sig","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\n This paper critically revisits traditional perspectives on technology within academic and scientific writing\n studies. It aims to comprehend the intricate, emerging, and dynamic sociotechnical configurations that underlie contemporary\n scientific practices. These practices increasingly involve language, text, and literacy practices, seen as products of the\n collaboration between humans and machines. The paper draws on empirical research on influential institutional metadiscourses in\n high-impact scientific writing produced and/or disseminated by public universities and a research institute in the State of São\n Paulo (Brazil), whose local policies of globalization are driven by international university rankings. I use a qualitative content\n analysis approach grounded in socio-anthropological, socio-semiotic, and pragmatic studies of linguistic ideologies to shed light\n on how ideological and socio-semiotic processes support the metapragmatics of scientific writing in university policy documents.\n This metapragmatics is utterly alien to the role of performative sociotechnical infrastructures in the production, distribution,\n and hierarchization of scientific texts. Additionally, these documents do not account for the diverse conditions and restrictions\n that shape the production and circulation of academic knowledge in geopolitically marginal and equally diverse regions within the\n country, including those within São Paulo.","PeriodicalId":252896,"journal":{"name":"Language, Culture and Society","volume":"78 12","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Language, Culture and Society","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1075/lcs.00044.sig","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

This paper critically revisits traditional perspectives on technology within academic and scientific writing studies. It aims to comprehend the intricate, emerging, and dynamic sociotechnical configurations that underlie contemporary scientific practices. These practices increasingly involve language, text, and literacy practices, seen as products of the collaboration between humans and machines. The paper draws on empirical research on influential institutional metadiscourses in high-impact scientific writing produced and/or disseminated by public universities and a research institute in the State of São Paulo (Brazil), whose local policies of globalization are driven by international university rankings. I use a qualitative content analysis approach grounded in socio-anthropological, socio-semiotic, and pragmatic studies of linguistic ideologies to shed light on how ideological and socio-semiotic processes support the metapragmatics of scientific writing in university policy documents. This metapragmatics is utterly alien to the role of performative sociotechnical infrastructures in the production, distribution, and hierarchization of scientific texts. Additionally, these documents do not account for the diverse conditions and restrictions that shape the production and circulation of academic knowledge in geopolitically marginal and equally diverse regions within the country, including those within São Paulo.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
算法能力与科学知识
本文批判性地重新审视了学术和科学写作研究中关于技术的传统观点。它旨在理解作为当代科学实践基础的复杂、新兴和动态的社会技术配置。这些实践越来越多地涉及语言、文本和读写实践,被视为人类与机器合作的产物。本文借鉴了对巴西圣保罗州公立大学和一家研究机构所撰写和/或传播的高影响力科学著作中具有影响力的机构元话语的实证研究,圣保罗州的全球化政策是由国际大学排名所驱动的。我采用以社会人类学、社会--交际学和语言意识形态的语用学研究为基础的定性内容分析方法,来揭示意识形态和社会--交际过程是如何支持大学政策文件中科学写作的语用学的。这种元语法与表演性社会技术基础设施在科学文本的生产、传播和分级中的作用完全格格不入。此外,这些文件也没有考虑到地缘政治边缘地区和国内同样多样化的地区(包括圣保罗)学术知识的生产和流通所面临的各种条件和限制。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
2.00
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Algorithmic power and scientific knowledge Manufacturing Academic Knowledge ‘But we’re among peers!’ Seeking access. Applied ethnopoetic analysis Seeking access. Applied ethnopoetic analysis
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1