MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1985311462 · doi:10.1177/1470357209343360

Identities in action: a nexus analysis of identity construction and language shift

2009· article· en· W1985311462 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Pia Lane

Bibliographic record

VenueVisual Communication · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicMultilingual Education and Policy
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIdentity (music)Value (mathematics)Action (physics)Meaning (existential)SociologyNexus (standard)The SymbolicSocial identity theoryLinguisticsSymbolic powerCarry (investment)Gender studiesSocial psychologyAestheticsEpistemologySocial groupSocial sciencePsychologyLawComputer sciencePolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article investigates language shift and identity construction in two Finnic-speaking communities: Lappe in Ontario, Canada and Bugøynes in Northern Norway by asking how the people of these two communities perceive themselves at a time when their minority language is in the process of disappearing. Identity construction through visual and linguistic means are analysed and compared. In both communities, people speak similar minority languages, observe similar traditions and have Finnish items in their homes, but such actions do not carry the same symbolic value. In Lappe, these items and traditions have been allocated social meaning; they are explicitly referred to as ‘Finn’, whereas similar items and traditions do not carry any overt symbolic value in Bugøynes. This symbolic value, or lack thereof, is not a direct result of the items and traditions themselves; rather they mediate social action. An analysis of the social actions and the way these actions take part in identity construction reveals that it is not the traditions and items in themselves that carry symbolic value, but rather the actions that precede or accompany them.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.069
Threshold uncertainty score0.138

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0070.029
Scholarly communication0.0060.005
Open science0.0010.008
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.076
GPT teacher head0.529
Teacher spread0.453 · 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 designQualitative
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

Citations27
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueVisual CommunicationSame topicMultilingual Education and PolicyFrench-language works237,207