Sociolinguistic Consciousness and Spoken English in Nigerian Tertiary Institutions
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The present status of English as a global language has led to the proliferation of many varieties of English all over the world, which according to Achebe (1965: 29) “is the price a world language…must pay in submission to many kinds of use”. English as a global language has developed many varieties, which differ from the “standard” to the ‘non standard’. Based on the extent of research thus far, there is no doubt that Nigerian English exists. To show its importance, it is made compulsory to every student in tertiary institution, no matter the student’s field of study. Every student is expected to speak simple and correct English as it is the language of instruction and communication. On the function allocated to the use of English in tertiary institutions, everybody tries mastering the language both the written and the spoken forms. In our tertiary institutions, it is common to hear the students exhibit their proficiency in the language in relation to multidimensional space of level of education, ethnic background, discipline and style. In the teaching of English in our tertiary institutions, the argument is that the teachers of English have to be conscious of the sociolinguistic variables that may affect students’ performance before embarking on effective teaching. We adopt ‘Accommodation Theory’ (1991) by Giles and Coupland as our “Theoretical Frame”, while our analysis of ‘the selected Sociolinguistic variables are based on “Labovian Quantitative Method (1972: 181). Our analysis shows that for effective learning to take place, language instructors must be conscious of the social factors that may affect the learning and speaking of English in a second language situation.
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 | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| 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".