A<scp>N</scp>ewfoundland Ethnicity? The Political Implications of Post‐Confederation Nationalism in<scp>N</scp>ewfoundland
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Ethnicity is very much at the core of the individual and has been known to constitute the basis of nationalisms. Loosely speaking, an ethnic group refers to those who identify with one another through a number of shared characteristics (e.g. culture, language, or religion). Based on this, scholars would agree that most Quebeckers meet the criteria – but what about Newfoundlanders? Does calling oneself a ‘ N ewfoundlander’ invoke a specific set of linguistic or cultural features that are held to be common? Are Newfoundlanders an ethnic group? If a ‘ N ewfoundland ethnicity’ exists, could a ‘ N ewfoundland ethnic identity’ lead to a post‐Confederation N ewfoundland nationalism? In order to address these questions, I use a modified version of what Anthony D. Smith (1986) says constitutes the core of national identity, the ethnie , and, to place the analysis in context, I briefly discuss nationalism and ethnicity. Following this, I provide an overview of the origins of a N ewfoundland ethnogenesis, a review of key post‐Confederation N ewfoundland ‘nationalist’ events, as well as an analysis of each aspect of ethnie from a N ewfoundland perspective. The article concludes by arguing that while Newfoundlanders can be considered a distinct ethnic group, the likelihood of a post‐Confederation N ewfoundland nationalism emerging is low.
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 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 | 0.002 | 0.012 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".