The English-Only Movement: A Communication Analysis of Changing Perceptions of Language Vitality
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper reexamines the potential impact of the English-only movement on linguistic minorities and Anglos' perceptions of their own and minority groups' language vitality. Of particular interest is the Hispanic population — the fastest growing minority in the U.S. Communication scholars have paid only scant attention to the English-only movement and how it affects the social and communication climate for Latinos. However, literature reviews prepared for the American Psychological Association and for Teachers of English to Speakers of Other Languages (in 1991 and 1995, respectively) concluded that English-only initiatives have negative consequences for limited-English proficiency groups. Revisiting this still-growing issue in the light of more recent studies across disciplines and media reports, we examine how Anglo support for English-only policies limits the use, promotion, and salience of minority languages like Spanish in institutional settings and in the linguistic landscape and suggest directions for future research.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it