MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1527016384

국제어, 글로벌 언어로서의 영어

2011· article· ko· W1527016384 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
송경숙

Bibliographic record

Venue새한영어영문학 · 2011
Typearticle
Languageko
FieldComputer Science
TopicEducational Research and Pedagogy
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsWorld EnglishesStandard EnglishEnglish languageTest of English as a Foreign LanguageEnglish studiesLanguage assessmentInternational languageLinguisticsSociologyPedagogyPolitical sciencePsychologyMathematics education
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper explores English as an international and global language with reference to Korean university students’ language attitudes towards standard English and World Englishes, and discusses pedagogical implications. This paper first introduces the notion of international language, and explains the spread and various roles of English around the world. After introducing the notion of standard English, this paper examines Korean university students’ language attitudes towards standard English, as well as learning standard English and World Englishes. It was found that Korean university students consider not only American and British English as standard English, but also Canadian, Australian, and New Zealand English as attractive candidates. Korean university students also demonstrate positive attitudes and open-mindedness about learning English in the Inner Circle countries (U.S, Canada, Australia, New Zealand) as well as English in the Outer Circle countries (Singapore, Malaysia, Hong Kong, Philippine). This paper confirms the critical language pedagogy and paradigm shift in teaching/learning English as an international and global language, and World Englishes.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.021

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.214
GPT teacher head0.382
Teacher spread0.168 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venue새한영어영문학Same topicEducational Research and PedagogyFrench-language works237,207