Plurality and world Englishes: The social realities of language use
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ABSTRACT In spite of decades of scholarship on plurality and in particular Englishes, discussion in some academic quarters in recent years has questioned this fundamental aspect of language/English use, with some coming to view plurality (of Englishes) in fact as marginalizing and segregating (cf. Bruthiaux 2003; Pennycook 2003, 2008; Saraceni 2010; Ur 2010). In light of now nearly four decades of scholarship on world Englishes (WE), by Yamuna Kachru as well as innumerable other scholars, this paper revisits the core concepts that form the foundation for plurality and consequently WE, concepts that must be addressed if plurality (of Englishes) is to be challenged. The discussion revisits the numerous foundational concepts in (socio)linguistics for WE, and gives particular consideration to the notion of the speech community in light of the higher degree of mobility and virtual interaction in the contemporary era.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it