MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W214047036 · doi:10.46538/hlj.6.2.4

Korean Heritage Language Maintenance and Language Ideology

2008· article· en· W214047036 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueHeritage Language Journal · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicMultilingual Education and Policy
Canadian institutionsYork University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIdeologyParticipant observationHeritage languageEthnographyCultural assimilationLanguage ideologySociologyLinguisticsPsychologyGender studiesPedagogyPolitical scienceSocial scienceEthnic groupAnthropology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper explores ways in which language ideology is linked to maintenance of Korean as a heritage language by Koreans in America. The data for this ethnographic study come from three separate sources: 1) a Korean language program at an American university; 2) a community-based ESL program for Korean seniors; and 3) a recently immigrated Korean family. Data collection methods include participant observation; informal conversations with the participants; in-depth interviews; and on-site document analysis. Through regular and sustained interaction with participants in the three research sites over a period of three years, the findings provide insights into ways in which the participants’ attitudes toward language learning and maintenance are continuously shaped and revised based on their life circumstances. This paper describes each participant’s language attitudes as fluid entities operating on a continuum of assimilationist ideologies on the one end and pluralist ideologies on the other.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.127
Threshold uncertainty score0.998

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.033
GPT teacher head0.386
Teacher spread0.354 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it