Les voix de la ville revisitées. Sociolinguistique urbaine ou linguistique de la ville ?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Depuis 1994, la sociolinguistique s'est principalement penchée sur le terrain urbain, au point qu'on a pu se demander s'il n'y avait pas là un lien de nécessité, si la ville n'était pas le terrain par excellence de l'approche sociale des faits de langue. L'exploration de ce questionnement nous mènera, bien sûr, à parcourir les avancées de la science depuis dix ans, mais aussi à nous interroger sur les différentes visions de la ville qui apparaissent dans les diverses publications et sur les différents choix de villes : une analyse d'une ville africaine ou asiatique très plurilingue ne mène pas nécessairement aux mêmes retombées théoriques que celle d'une ville européenne plus unifiée linguistiquement. Enfin, on s'interrogera sur la pertinence de l'opposition linguistique / sociolinguistique en prenant le ville comme pierre de touche.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.007 | 0.013 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.010 | 0.010 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.010 | 0.001 |
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".