Switches to English during French Service Encounters: Relationships with L2 French Speakers’ Willingness to Communicate and Motivation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This exploratory study investigated second language (L2) French speakers’ service encounters in the multilingual se ing of Montreal, specifically whether switches to English during French service encounters were related to L2 speakers’ willingness to communicate or motivation. Over a two-week period, 17 French L2 speakers in Montreal submitted online questionnaires after they concluded service encounters that they had initiated in French. Their willingness to communicate in French was higher when the service provider did not switch to English; however, the frequency of English switches was not related to their general motivation to learn French. Possible reasons for language switches are explored, and pedagogical implications are highlighted. Ce e étude exploratoire porte sur des consultations qu’ont eues des locuteurs de français L2 dans le milieu plurilingue qu’est Montréal; plus précisément, les auteures se penchent sur la question de savoir si les transferts du français vers l’anglais pendant les consultations étaient liés à la volonté des locuteurs L2 à communiquer ou à la motivation. Au cours d’une période de deux semaines, 17 locuteurs de français L2 à Montréal ont complété des questionnaires en ligne après avoir eu des consultations qu’ils avaient initiées en français. Ils étaient plus motivés à communiquer en français quand le fournisseur de services ne passait pas à l’anglais; toutefois, la fréquence des transferts vers l’anglais n’était pas liée à leur motivation générale pour apprendre le français. Les auteures évoquent des raisons possibles pour le passage à l’anglais et en soulignent les répercussions pédagogiques.
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 | 0.002 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| 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".