MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2186057256 · doi:10.18806/tesl.v18i1.904

A Response to "Sexism in the English Language"

2000· article· en· W2186057256 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Margaret Piercey

Bibliographic record

VenueTESL Canada Journal · 2000
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicGender Studies in Language
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLinguisticsPsychologyLanguage assessmentLanguage transferSociologyComprehension approachLanguage educationPedagogyPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Piercey says there is inherent sexism in the English language. This would mean that the language deliberately discriminates against one sex in favor of the other. But gender is not sex; sex is not gender. Gender rules in language have nothing to do with sex or sexism. In the five languages I speak, the rules of grammar dictate that the masculine noun or pronoun stands for both genders when no one person or thing is specified. As we used to say in high school, "Ladies first except in French grammar," which was a jocular way of reinforcing this grammatical rule.

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 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)0.002
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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.470
Threshold uncertainty score0.984

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0170.000

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.289
Teacher spread0.277 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designNot applicable
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
Published2000
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTESL Canada JournalSame topicGender Studies in LanguageFrench-language works237,207