«English koraa yεde Twi mixe!» Is the Variety of Akan Spoken by Ghanaian Immigrants in Italy Developing into a Mixed-Code?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper illustrates the results of qualitative analysis of a sample of face-to-face interactions and of formal interviews (a total of 27 hours of recordings) involving a selected group of Ghanaian immigrants in Northern Italy. A distinguishing feature of the variety of Akan spoken by the above-mentioned immigrants is the systematic insertion of English ‘chunks’ (e.g. single words or phrases), which do not appear to fulfill any pragmatic or discursive function. Community members show a considerable degree of awareness in this respect and display ambivalent attitudes towards this ‘mixed’ variety of Akan, which appears to be spoken not only by those immigrants who speak it as a lingua franca (and who may not have completed the corresponding language acquisition process), but by Akan native speakers as well. It is argued that the variety of Akan spoken within the Ghanaian community in Bergamo is currently going through a transitional process that leads from code-switching to the development of a mixed code, as illustrated in Auer (1999).
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 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".