Bibliographic record
Abstract
ABSTRACT/RESUME Since the late nineteenth century the rate of ethnic intermarriage has been increasing in Canada. This paper analyzes current levels of ethnic intermarriage in Canada during the 1990s in relation to the historical trends reported in earlier analyses. Differences between husbands and wives and the native-born and foreign-born are examined for Canada as a whole using data from the 1996 Census. Intermarriage data are also presented for husbands and wives residing in five Prairie major CMAs as well as for Toronto, Montreal, and Vancouver. Overall, husbands tend to marry exogamously to a slightly greater extent than wives, the native-born tend to exhibit higher rates of ethnic exogamy than their foreign-born counterparts, and the Prairie CMAs have higher rates of ethnic endogamy compared to Toronto, Montreal, and Vancouver. Depuis la fin du dix-neuvieme siecle, le taux de marriage entre divers groupes ethniques au Canada a toujours augmente. Le present article fait l'analyse des niveaux courants d'intermarriage ethnique au Canada pendant les annees 1990s, quant a les tendances historiques rapportes ailleurs. Les differences entre les maris et les epouses, et entre les Canadiens de naissance et ceux qui sont de provenance etrangere, sont examinees en somme, en utilisant les donnees du Recensement de 1996. Les donnees pour l'intermarriage ethnique sont aussi presentees pour les maris et les epouses qui habite a cinq villes majeurs (CMAs) des Prairies, et aussi pour Toronto, Montreal, et Vancouver. En general, les maris se dirigent vers le marriage exogame un peu plus que les epouses, les Canadiens de naissance montre des taux d'exogame ethnique plus eleves que leurs contre-parties de provenance etrangere, et les villes majeurs (CMAs) des Prairies ont des taux plus eleves de l'endogame ethnique en comparaison de Toronto, Montreal, et Vancouver. INTRODUCTION By definition, intermarriage means the crossing of some well-defined line such as ethnic origin or religion in mate selection. Thus, ethnic intermarriage (ethnic exogamy) occurs when an individual marries a spouse of an ethnic origin different from his or her own. On the other hand, ethnic endogamy (ethnic intramarriage) occurs when an individual marries someone of the same ethnic origin as him- or herself. In a multicultural society such as Canada, minority persons who marry within their own minority ethnic or cultural origin group are said to be more ethnically-connected than individuals who marry exogamously. They are considered to be relatively more assimilated than those who retain their original ethnic ties through marriage. The purpose of this paper is to analyze current levels of ethnic intermarriage in Canada during the 1990s in relation to the historical trends of ethnic intermarriage reported in an earlier analysis by Kalbach (2000). Variations in intermarriage patterns for both native-born and foreign-born husbands and wives will be examined for a selected number of ethnic origin groups, e.g., English, Irish, Scottish, French, Ukrainian, German, Greek, Italian, Chinese, East Indian, West Asian/Arab, and Black/Caribbean ethnic origins at the time of the 1996 Census. This paper also examines the overall pattern of ethnic intermarriage regardless of ethnic origin for husbands and wives living in Toronto, Montreal, and Vancouver and the five Prairie CMAs, i.e., Edmonton, Calgary, Regina, Saskatoon, and Winnipeg. Intermarriage and Assimilation Certain behaviours are commonly considered indicators of assimilation. In a predominantly English-speaking society like Canada, for example, an immigrant who can speak English is considered more assimilated or acculturated than one who cannot. Similarly, a relatively higher degree of assimilation is attributed to an immigrant who marries a spouse of a different ethnic or cultural origin than to one who remains ethnically-connected through marriage to his/her own group. …
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".