MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2038208183 · doi:10.1353/his.0.0013

Languages of Ethnicity: Teaching German in Waterloo County's Schools, 1850–1915

2008· article· fr· W2038208183 on OpenAlexvenueaboutno aff
Barbara Lorenzkowski

Bibliographic record

VenueHistoire sociale · 2008
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCanadian Identity and History
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGermanEthnic groupPidginFirst languageLinguisticsMeaning (existential)SociologyGender studiesPolitical scienceHistoryPsychologyAnthropologyCreole language

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

La classe d'allemand des écoles publiques du comté de Waterloo, en Ontario, a braqué le feu des projecteurs sur l'ethnicité locale de la région et suscité des débats publics sur le sens à donner à la langue allemande et sur l'importance de celle-ci comme vecteur d'identité culturelle. Les leaders ethniques cherchaient ardemment à préserver la « pureté » ancestrale de leur langue maternelle et à stimuler l'inscription aux programmes d'enseignement de l'allemand. Or, les langues de l'ethnicité dans le comté de Waterloo n'étaient pas assujetties à la norme allemande dont les leaders ethniques cherchaient à faire la seule expression légitime de la langue maternelle. Plutôt, une langue allemande locale émaillée de phases, d'une syntaxe, de mots et d'expressions idiomatiques de langue anglaise est demeurée un moyen de communication pendant une bonne partie du vingtième siècle. Ce nouveau parler fluide – le « pidgin » allemand, comme l'appelaient à la blague les chefs de file ethniques – reflétait l'hybride culturel qu'était le comté de Waterloo.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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 score0.236
Threshold uncertainty score0.475

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0080.004
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.260
Teacher spread0.244 · 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

Citations4
Published2008
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHistoire socialeSame topicCanadian Identity and HistoryFrench-language works237,207