Changes in Language, Communication and Thought: A Study on Linguistic Discrimination against the Indigenous People of the Chittagong Hill Tracts, Bangladesh
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The Chittagong Hill Tracts that situated in the southeastern part of Bangladesh bordering Burma and India has been known as a conflict zone in South Asia. The conflicting situation between the indigenous peoples and Bengalis was worsened due to immigration of Bengalis, displacement of the indigenous peoples, and military intervention in the Hill Tracts. Putting an end of the two- and half-decade-long bloody conflict, an agreement (“peace agreement”) was signed in December 02, 1997; nonetheless, still the region is neither a peaceful nor a secured region to its inhabitants. However, in the conflicting situation that began in the 1970s, the indigenous minorities are to adopt with the mainstream society and culture. This paper attempts to explore the ‘cope mechanism’ in which the indigenous peoples are communicating with the mainstream Bengalis, focusing on (the situations of) the indigenous languages among other resources of culture. Here ‘cope mechanism’ is not only to manage their fear, and conflict in Chittagong Hill Tracts, but also to negotiate the cultural dimension, in which the Hill culture is schematized both in the Bengalis views toward Hill culture and the indigenous peoples views on their own culture.Key words: Indigenous; Conflict; Displacement; Pahari; Bangali; Bangla Language; Assimilation.
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 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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".