MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W21855674 · doi:10.1016/j.ajo.2011.04.024

1.5 and 2nd Generation Luso-Canadian Mothering: Language and Cultural Retention in the Greater Toronto Area

2013· article· en· W21855674 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Sara Vieira

Bibliographic record

Venuepublished · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicMultilingual Education and Policy
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLinguisticsSociologyHistoryPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This presentation is based on my thesis that identifies what the division of labour surrounding language and cultural retention is for 6-8 Canadian women of Portuguese decent (Luso-Canadians). Specifically, the issue of choice of retention and transmission of language and culture to children is addressed. These women are an interesting group as their social position enables a cultural hybridity where they choose which aspects of their culture(s) they would like to accept or reject and which to transmit to children. Rooted in a qualitative research design that involved interviewing, this presentation addresses: Do second generation Luso-Canadian mothers desire to sustain Portuguese cultural habits in themselves and subsequently teach their children? If so, what progressive steps do they take to ensure this? Do changes in family structure assist/hinder their choices? Initial findings suggest that regardless of partner’s ethnicity, there are varied differences associated with retention. For some, there may be a tension between wanting to be ‘Canadian’, and the broken language transmission between older family members. For others, there may be no value associated, and subsequently no need to teach culture and language that is not ‘Canadian’. The children in these households inevitably bear the future prospects of maintaining a vibrant Portuguese community in the Greater Toronto Area. Although the Portuguese community is a large population in relation to other immigrant groups in Canada, studies in Canadian academic journals are comparatively lower than other groups. This project will add to the existing literature while reflecting a small group of Luso-Canadian mothers.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.025
Threshold uncertainty score0.184

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.003
Science and technology studies0.0100.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0090.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.061
GPT teacher head0.363
Teacher spread0.303 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractno

Explore more

Same venuepublishedSame topicMultilingual Education and PolicyFrench-language works237,207