Second Language Learning and Cultural Representations: Beyond Competence and Identity
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The socio‐contextual model of second language (L2) learning proposes that L2 learning is influenced by aspects of contact with the L2 community, L2 confidence, and identification to both the first language and L2 community ( Clément, 1980 ; Noels & Clément, 1996 ). The present study examines how these aspects are linked to individuals' cultural representations, corresponding to attitudes toward the L2 community ( Sperber, 1996 ). Respondents included Francophone (n= 50) and Anglophone (n= 50) university students with low and high ethnolinguistic vitality, respectively. Path analyses were conducted in order to examine the interrelations between aspects of the socio‐contextual model and cultural representations. These analyses revealed that, for both groups, learning an L2 leads individuals to hold more positive and accepting views of the L2 community. Implications of the findings are discussed with respect to ethnolinguistic vitality, L2 learning, and cultural representations.
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 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.008 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".