Anthropologie des pratiques langagières en Louisiane francophone : enjeux identitaires des processus redénominatifs de l’ethnonyme des Cadjins
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Dans un contexte d’infériorisation ethno-sociolinguistique, les Cadjins francophones de Louisiane ont entrepris depuis les années 1970 des actions de revitalisation linguistique et culturelle pour lutter contre l’américanisation de la communauté et l’étiolement du parler vernaculaire. Une action glottopolitique majeure porte sur la détermination du nom du peuple porteur de significations historiques et ethno-symboliques. Plusieurs ethnonymes en concurrence circulent, dont les représentations associées mettent en évidence pour chaque désignant une dimension particulière du fait franco-louisianais et, ainsi, privilégient une certaine conception de l’identité communautaire. L’auteur examine la fluctuation de ce paradigme désignationnel, les enjeux ethnonymiques, le processus de redénomination imposé par les militants, l’évolution du nom ethnique depuis l’origine acadienne et l’identité émergente interculturelle et translinguistique d’une nouvelle génération de Cadjins anglophones.
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 | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.008 | 0.008 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".