Negotiating Métis culture in Michif: Disrupting Indigenous language shift
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Language contact, shift, and multilingualism are social processes inherent within power relationships under colonization and globalization that have shifted the values of languages and impacted cultures based upon political power. To explore understandings of language, colonization and globalization in regard to Indigenous peoples, the article considers the case of language negotiations amongst the Metis - Indigenous peoples of Canada and Northern United States who speak Michif. Michif is a contact language created in the 1800’s under the forces of colonization but which is increasingly affected by the dominance of the English language under continuing colonization and globalization. This article shares discussions with Metis Elders who focus attention on 1) The Meaning of Nehiyewak Language in Metis Communities, 2) Negotiating Identities through Language in Metis Contexts, and 3) Importance of Sharing Stories in Indigenous Languages and Relationships to Land. Discussion follows of lifestyles, racial categories and repression of identities, languages and relationships to self and culture, relationships to English, and language revitalization. Conclusions suggest some of the many forms that Michif language retention and revitalization might take as options for the future.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.014 | 0.009 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.006 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".