MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W2298499405

Strategies for moving ahead: Linguistics and community goals

2011· other· en· W2298499405 sur OpenAlexaboutno aff

Notice bibliographique

RevueAmericanae (AECID Library) · 2011
Typeother
Langueen
DomaineSocial Sciences
ThématiqueMultilingual Education and Policy
Établissements canadiensnon disponible
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésDocumentationPublic relationsSustainabilitySociologyPedagogyWork (physics)Engineering ethicsPolitical sciencePsychologyLinguisticsEngineeringComputer science
DOInon disponible

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

This conference is called “Strategies for Moving Ahead.” I would like to address the pillars of the title, documentation and conservation, and examine some different models than are usually found in the literature on documentation, conservation, and revitalization that provide strategies, under appropriate circumstances, for moving ahead. In early discussions of language documentation, the recording of language is generally the primary goal, with work with communities taking a secondary role. There has been increasing emphasis on community more recently, with language and linguistics continuing to be at the centre in discussions of this extended view of documentation. Communities are often interested in language conservation, with revitalization frequently part of a broader goal of community development, sustainability, and growth. Where the linguistic notion of documentation fits the community goals is not always clear. In this talk, I would like to describe two projects that I have been involved with that have such goals, and look at the role that linguistics plays. One project, Ciimaan (‘canoe’ in Anishinaabemowin), is run out of the University of Toronto, and was designed as an urban learning community for participants to become bi-cultural navigators. Ciimaan provides an opportunity to develop transferable job and leadership skills while teaching, learning, and promoting Anishinaabemowin through culturally-based activities and community projects. What role might a linguist play in such a project that is motivated by goals of creating community? The program, while focused on language, did not engage the skills that a linguist has to offer at the start, but those skills have come to be regarded as critical to the overall conception of the project. The second project, the Déline Knowledge Project, has been going on in Déline, Northwest Territories, Canada for some time. This project is broadly concerned with traditional knowledge and self government. Language is one important interest, and there has been extensive work done on recording, archiving, transcription of stories, as well as work with youth on valuing cultural knowledge, including language. As this a community-driven project has evolved, participants have become increasingly interested in developing dictionaries, in literacy, in language variation, and in other areas where linguists have a contribution to make, and have sought education in linguistics. This was not the starting point, but, as with Ciimaan, linguistics has come to be a critical piece of the work of rethinking community governance. In these cases, language plays an essential role in ongoing work on efforts to strengthen the community. In both cases, the starting point has been community rather than language and language documentation. The role of linguistic work has emerged from other priorities, being one piece of a complex, with the linguist part of a team of academic and community researchers working together to move ahead, and contributions to language understanding often arising in rather indirect ways.

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 distillée sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,000
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesCharge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Sans objet · Signal consensuel: Sans objet
GenreSignal candidat: Autre · Signal consensuel: Autre
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,508
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,996

Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0000,001
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0000,000
Bibliométrie0,0000,000
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0000,001
Communication savante0,0000,000
Science ouverte0,0000,000
Intégrité de la recherche0,0000,000
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0050,000

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 Opus0,076
Tête enseignante GPT0,404
Écart entre enseignants0,327 · 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 tête enseignante, pas un consensus.

Devis d'étudeSans objet
Domainenon disponible
GenreAutre

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
Publié2011
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueAmericanae (AECID Library)Même sujetMultilingual Education and PolicyTravaux en français237 207