Thirty Years after Bill 101: A Contemporary Perspective on Attitudes Towards English and French in Montreal.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract This paper presents a 2007 study that was conducted amongst 147 young anglophone, francophone and allophone Montrealers in order to shed light on their attitudes towards English and French in terms of status and solidarity. The study made use of both a questionnaire and a matched-guise experiment. The findings indicate that while a certain amount of status was attributed to French, most likely as a result of language policy and planning measures such as Bill 101, significantly more status was attributed to English—most likely a result of the utilitarian value that the language holds as the global lingua franca. Regarding the solidarity dimension, it appears that while the respondents recognised the social desirability of having an affective attachment to the French language, at a more private level, they held more positive attitudes towards English. These can tentatively be explained in terms of the respondents’ social identity. Résumé L’article ci-dessous présente une recherche menée en 2007 parmi 147 étudiants montréalais (anglophones, francophones et allophones) qui eut pour objectif d’examiner leurs attitudes envers l’anglais comparé au français en terme de statut et de solidarité. Un questionnaire et une étude des faux-couples furent utilisés comme méthodes de recherche. Les résultats indiquent qu’un certain statut est attribué au français, ce qui est probablement une conséquence des lois langagières comme la Loi 101. Néanmoins, un statut plus important est attribué à l’anglais, ce qui est probablement une conséquence de sa valeur utilitaire comme lingua franca globale. En ce qui concerne la dimension de la solidarité, bien que les jeunes montréalais semblent conscients de l’importance sociale de se sentir attachés à la langue française, lorsque l’on considère un aspect plus personnel, ils tendent à manifester des attitudes plus positives envers l’anglais. Ces attitudes plus positives envers l’anglais peuvent être expliquées comme résultats de différentes identités sociales.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.006 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 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".