MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W2022275341 · doi:10.1353/ces.2014.0000

Multiculturalism within a Bilingual Framework: Language, Race and Belonging to Canada by Eve Haque (review)

2014· article· en· W2022275341 sur OpenAlexvenueaboutno aff
Diane Gérin‐Lajoie

Notice bibliographique

RevueCanadian ethnic studies · 2014
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineSocial Sciences
ThématiqueMultilingual Education and Policy
Établissements canadiensnon disponible
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésMulticulturalismRace (biology)SociologyGender studiesLinguisticsPedagogy

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

Reviewed by: Multiculturalism within a Bilingual Framework: Language, Race and Belonging to Canada by Eve Haque Diane Gérin-Lajoie Eve Haque. Multiculturalism within a Bilingual Framework: Language, Race and Belonging to Canada. Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 2012. 309 pp. Notes. Bibliography. Index. $29.95 sc. This book gives a detailed account of how the Canadian 1969 Official Languages Act and the 1971 Multiculturalism policy emerged out of the Royal Commission on Bilingualism and Biculturalism that took place across Canada in the 1960s, better [End Page 219] known as the B and B Commission. The author attributes the creation of the B and B Commission to three mean reasons: “the radical changes taking place in immigration policy, the federal government’s attempts to abolish the Indian Act, and the rise of Quebec’s linguistic nationalism …” (31). In her discussion, the author argues that ethnic groups other than the majority Anglophone and Francophone communities, despite the fact that they were invited to participate in the discussion, were in fact excluded from the decision-making process—as in the case of the Indigenous groups. These groups lacked political power vis-à-vis the Anglophones and Francophones, considered, in the official discourse, as the “founding races” in Canada. Using the methodological approach of Foucault’s genealogy, where history is not understood as a continuity of events, but rather as “oriented to revealing discontinuities” (26), the author undertook a thorough analysis of key documents from the B and B Commission—the preliminary hearings and report, the public hearings and the research conducted in the context of the Commission, Book I on the official languages, and Book IV on the cultural contributions of the other ethnic groups. Her analysis focused on the role played by ethnic and indigenous groups in the work of the B and B Commission. Written in a very accessible style, the book explores various key debates that took place during the B and B Commission work. The first debate concerned the use of the word “race” to define the country’s founding groups (Anglophones and Francophones). The term of reference “founding races” was highly criticized by many. The word “race” was a source of misunderstanding, even though the Commission tried to present it as a synonym for “nation.” Interestingly enough, in the French versions of the commission’s documents, this word was not used and the “founding races” were rather named “les deux peuples fondateurs.” The author illustrates this debate by looking specifically at the contributions of key individuals from the Commission, as well as at those of influential representatives of diverse groups who did not agree with this term, although for different reasons. The major contribution of this book is to draw attention to the profound contradiction regarding the importance of the language in the maintenance of a culture. The B and B Commission argued that in the context of the two “founding races,” language was crucial in the building of the Canadian nation. When it came to the other ethnic groups, however, language was claimed to be secondary to culture. It was implicitly understood that in order to integrate, members of other ethnic groups would need to use either English or French at least in the public sphere, and that use of their mother tongue was a private matter. This discourse constructed the rationale for the creation of the Official Languages Act in 1969. “Race” lost its importance to language and culture, which became two major notions in the discourse of the [End Page 220] Commission. The weight given to language in the context of the founding peoples exacerbated the power imbalance between the majority and the minorities. Consequently, Canada remained a White-settler society. The author provides a solid argumentation when discussing the power imbalance between the founding people and the other ethnic groups, which resulted in two important federal legislations: the Canadian Official Languages Act and the policy on Multiculturalism within a bilingual framework. As presented by the author, language for other ethnic groups continued to be treated as a matter of the private sphere. In the case of the founding peoples, however, language was at the very core of the debate. The stakes were much higher...

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier

Prédiction machine sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,001
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesaucune
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Sans objet · Signal consensuel: Sans objet
GenreSignal candidat: Synthèse · Signal consensuel: Synthèse
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,420
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,845

Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0010,003
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0010,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0020,001
Bibliométrie0,0040,009
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0020,001
Communication savante0,0040,002
Science ouverte0,0010,002
Intégrité de la recherche0,0020,002
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0060,001

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,096
Tête enseignante GPT0,484
Écart entre enseignants0,388 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.

Les modèles n’ont appliqué aucune catégorie : rien dans la taxonomie ne correspondait à ce travail.
Devis d'étudeSans objet
Domainenon disponible
GenreSynthèse

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations0
Publié2014
Routes d'admission2
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueCanadian ethnic studiesMême sujetMultilingual Education and PolicyTravaux en français237 207