Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper investigates the dominant use of English by institutional service providers such as courts, state hospitals and pharmacies, state departments and local governments, South African provincial legislatures and tertiary institutions of learning. It is argued that in contrast to other countries, i.e. Belgium, Canada and Sweden where interpreting services are primarily used to accommodate immigrants, South Africa requires interpreters to communicate with its own citizens. The absence of interpreting services makes for an alarming level of misunderstanding and disempowerment affecting the quality of services provided by institutional service providers and barring citizens from information and help. However, when trained interpreters (liaison and conference interpreters) are available, a lack of insight into their role as well as a perceived breach of confidentiality, often result in frustration for all parties concerned. This paper will attempt to give a broad overview of the current state of interpreting in South Africa with specific reference to the use of interpreting services to facilitate communication between state and parastatal institutions and citizens. In conclusion, the impact of a lack of language facilitation, and in a South African context, the hegemony of English, on the individual's perception of his/her identity is considered.
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 | 0.008 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.006 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.007 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".