Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract. With the realisation that the future of French in Québec depends on its adoption by a growing number of immigrants, efforts have intensified in recent years to promote a less ethnic and more civic conception of Québécois identity. As attested by the title of the final report of the Commission des États généraux sur la situation et l'avenir de la langue française au Québec (French, a Language for Everyone), a key component of this new conception is the idea that French should be a langue publique commune (common public language) for all those residing in Québec, irrespective of ethnic origin. This article examines the notion of langue publique commune in more detail. While the concept assumes that language can somehow be ‘de‐ethnicised’ to become the property of all ethnic groups, observations made in other contexts only confirm the inextricable link between language and the ethnic, as opposed to the civic, dimension of national identity. The article also investigates the issue of language motivation, in particular the related challenge faced by the Québécois authorities of how to encourage so‐called new Quebecers to adopt French as their language of public communications.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 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".