De la fécondité de certaines transgressions dans le domaine linguistique
Bibliographic record
Abstract
La notion de transgression mais aussi sa présence dans le domaine linguistique sont décrites du point de vue de l’évolution des langues en France et leurs usages, de l’établissement de corpus de français parlé et des spécificités du langage oral (les disfluences). La politique linguistique française, en imposant durant deux siècles un modèle monolingue (la langue française), eut des effets sur les langues régionales que le contexte actuel conduit à regretter : or, la transgression de ce modèle ne put avoir lieu. L’histoire de la langue des signes montre que des débats nombreux finirent par imposer un bilinguisme (langue oral-langes des signes) réclamé par les sourds eux-mêmes. L’évolution de la politique d’archivage de ressources langagières porte elle aussi les traces du purisme monolingue français et ce ne fut pas sans résistances que la variation de la langue orale fut reconnue comme enregistrable. Cette évolution a conduit, entre autres, à l‘étude d’une spécificité du langage oral : les disfluences. When transgressions are beneficial: Evidence from the linguistic domain Abstract: The concept of transgression and its presence in the linguistic field are described from the point of view of the evolution in regional and sign languages in France, the establishment of spoken French corpus and some characteristics in the spontaneous oral language. The language policy in France imposed a monolingual model (the French language) which had effects on the regional languages in the current context: the transgression of this model could not take place. The debates concerning the teaching policy including or not the signs language ended up imposing a bilingualism (oral French-signs language) which was wanted for a long time by the deaf persons themselves. The linguistic resources evolution in spoken French shows that it was not without any resistance that the oral language variations were considered as recordable. This evolution allowed the study of specific phenomena in the oral language: the disfluencies.
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 | 0.010 | 0.031 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.007 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.015 | 0.003 |
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".