De la préservation linguistique et nationale : la qualité de la langue de la jeunesse acadienne, un débat linguistique idéologique
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Cet article a pour objectif d’analyser un débat linguistique idéologique centré sur le rapport établi entre l’avenir de la francophonie canadienne, la qualité de la langue et le devoir de la jeunesse en la matière. L’idée que la jeunesse serait particulièrement responsable de la dégradation de la langue fait l’objet d’un discours ancien et sans cesse redéployé. Nous proposons une approche critique de son actualisation récente en Acadie, telle qu’elle s’est manifestée dans des publications médiatiques aux parentés argumentatives fortes, entre l’automne 2012 et le printemps 2013. Afin d’objectiver les prises de position, nous montrons qu’elles puisent légitimité et autorité dans les fondements idéologiques du nationalisme politique moderne, qui font de la langue le ciment de l’identité collective et de sa « bonne maîtrise » une compétence accessible sur base démocratique.
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 | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.015 | 0.028 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.014 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 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 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".