From French as a “Right” to French as “Added Value”: From Politics to Economics in Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Discourse about language has changed a great deal in Canada. For much of Canadian history, language was thought of as one dimension among others serving to make distinctions among cultural or “racial” groups, distinctions which were harnessed to social stratification in the colonial economy. It became the central terrain of struggle against economic marginalization of francophones in the middle of the twentieth century. Quebecois nationalist claims made French-English bilingualism a central value associated with the rights and obligations of Canadian citizenship starting in the 1960s. In this period, French is understood as a collective right. This discourse still exists, especially within the agencies of the Quebec state, but starting from around 1990, it is replaced in the discourse of the federal government, as well as in the institutions of francophones in the other provinces, as well as among some Quebecois, by a discourse emphasizing the importance of the francophone market,, the value of French and of authentic francophone cultural identity understood as commodities in the globalized new economy, and the collective economic development of francophone communities. In this article I will describe this discursive change, drawing on ethnographic work in the central institutional spaces of production of discourse about what “francophone” and “French” mean in Canada. I raise questions, finally, about what these changes mean for the ways the category “francophone” may remain a principle of the organization of labour in Canada.
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 | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.035 | 0.026 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.020 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 0.000 |
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".