Notice bibliographique
Résumé
It is no surprise to learn that language developments occurring in the legal field are leading the way in the historic process of giving Ontario a bilingual face. In the course of the last five years the traditional unilingualism of the Province's legal system has given away to a situation where French enjoys a limited, but signi- ficant status as one of the official languages of justice. At first, these developments seemed to have only a tangential effect on the Law Society. However, with many of the modifications now beginning to take effect, their veritable impact is coming home to the Law Society. The Law Society's monopoly over the Bar admission programme together with its influence and prestige in all matters concerning law in the Province, means that the Law Society's response to may have a significant effect on the long-term success of the Province's initiatives in this field. Therefore, the timing is propitious to consider the ramifications that the French language issue will have on the Law Society and its programmes.In dealing with this issue a number of questions arise. For example, what are the responsibilities of the Law Society in matters of language in the legal system? What posture should it adopt in face of the policy initiatives being pursued by the present Administration? More to the point, what exactly are these initiatives and how do they fit into the overall language programme of the Province? This paper endeavours to address these questions in the course of carrying out a review of what may be described as the bilingualism question and its foreseeable impact on the Law Society.The paper is divided into three parts. The first describes the nature of the initiatives taken to introduce French into the legal system. In the second part, an attempt will be made to sketch out in fairly broad strokes some of the policy considerations underlying the French language issue in Ontario and its effect on relations with the Province of Quebec. Here the objet will be to gain perspective on the motives behind the present Administration's programme to promote the use of French in the system of justice. In the third part, attention will turn to the role of the Law Society in these issues. It will be argued that the responsibility for legal training of new entrants to the Bar, when viewed in the context of recent governmental initiatives intended to make French language legal services available in the Province, entails a co-extensive duty on the part of the Law Society to assure that Bar admission instruction is offered in the French language. Limitations to the implementation of will then be considered, dealing first with such questions as the cost of bilingualism, its effect on English programmes, and the reservations, or backlash, some lawyers may exhibit towards these programmes, which serve as reasons to vary or limit the scope of French programmes in the Law Society.Of special interest in the paper is the criticism expressed by some lawyers that a French Bar admission programme may produce unilingual French-speaking lawyers. As shall be seen, this paper argues against the legitimacy of this objection, suggesting that it is harmful to the Law Society's best interests and contrary to the reality of the language setting in Ontario today. The paper will conclude with an examination of models that might be proposed for a French Bar admission programme, where the language issue is of greatest immediate concern. It will be suggested that an optional programme be established, akin to that used at the Ottawa University with a time-table for implementation of three to five years.
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 enseignantsNi 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.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,002 | 0,003 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,003 | 0,005 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,019 | 0,011 |
| Communication savante | 0,008 | 0,002 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,003 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,002 | 0,003 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,009 | 0,000 |
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.
score_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 découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».