La modification constitutionnelle de 1987, la reconnaissance du Québec comme société distincte et la dualité linguistique du Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
On June 3, 1987, the Prime Minister of Canada and the ten provincial premiers signed the 1987 Constitutional Accord in which they agreed to amend the Canadian Constitution in order to meet the Quebec government's conditions for adherence to the Constitution Act, 1982. The recognition of Canada's linguistic duality and of Quebec as a distinct society were among the constitutional amendments agreed upon. These clauses continue to spark controversy, with some commentators claiming that the terms used in the Accord are too ambiguous, while others argue that their insertion in the Constitution will give rise to politically undesirable results. The author considers the meaning of these clauses and presents an historical account of the notions of “duality” and “distinct society” by analyzing their essential elements. He argues that if governments have recognized duality in order to protect the official language minorities, the purpose of the clause dealing with the protection and promotion of Quebec's distinct society is to maintain and develop its Francophone character. Where these two objectives conflict, the clause in the Constitutional Accord recognizing Canada's linguistic duality will prevail. The Accord's potential impact on the division of legislative powers and the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms are also examined. In the author's opinion, the division of powers will not be modified; however, the recognition of duality and of Quebec as a distinct society may limit the potentially centralizing effects of the Charter. On the other hand, by relying on the duality clause, the courts will be able — should they so desire — to give the Charter's language guarantees a broader interpretation than they have until now been accorded. The author concludes by considering the possible interplay between the linguistic duality and the distinct society clauses once they are entrenched, and the multiculturalism clause (section 27 of the Charter,).
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 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.010 | 0.007 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.008 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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".