Discourses of endangerment : ideology and interest in the defence of languages
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
Preface, Sally Johnson (University of Leeds, UK) 1. Endangered discourses, Alexandre Duchene (Universitat Basel, Switzerland) and Monica Heller (University of Toronto, Canada) 2. Defending diversity, Shaylih Muehlmann (University of Toronto, Canada) 3. Indigenous language survival in Canada, Donna Patrick (Carleton University, Canada) 4. Who wants to save the Patois d'Evolene?, Marinette Matthey (University de Neuchatel, Switzerland) and Raphael Maitre (University de Neuchatel, Switzerland) 5. Linguistics, civil society and discourses of endangerment, Alexandra Jaffe (California State University, USA) 6. Discourses on language in the Ukraine, Patrick Seriot (Universite de Lausanne, Switzerland) 7. Language ideological debates in Sweden, Tommasso Milani (Stockholm University, Denmark) 8. Language endangerment, war and peace in Northern Ireland, Tony Crowley (Manchester University, UK) 9. The future of Catalan, Joan Pujolar (Universitat Oberta de Catalunya, Spain) 10. Competing discourses of language preservation along the Baie Sainte-Marie, Annette Boudreau and Lise Dubois (Universite de Moncton, Canada) 11. France and the preservation of French, Claudine Moise (Universite d'Avingnon et de Pays Vaucluse, France) 12. Defending English in an English-dominant world, Ron Schmidt (California State University, USA) 13. Language endangerment and verbal hygiene, Deborah Cameron (Oxford University, UK).
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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