MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2521541756 · doi:10.17509/bs_jpbsp.v12i1.3611

SIKAP MASYARAKAT PENGRAJIN DAN PEDAGANG KERAMIK TERHADAP BAHASA INDONESIA DAN BAHASA SUNDA

2016· article· id· W2521541756 on OpenAlexaff
Putrasulung Baginda

Bibliographic record

VenueJurnal Pendidikan Bahasa dan Sastra · 2016
Typearticle
Languageid
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicLinguistics and Language Analysis
Canadian institutionsWiLAN (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIndonesianContext (archaeology)SociologyGeographyHumanitiesArtLinguisticsPhilosophyArchaeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstrak Sikap Masyarakat Pengrajin dan Pedagang Keramik terhadap Bahasa Indonesia dan Bahasa Sunda. Masyarakat indonesia pada umumnya merupakan komunitas yang mampu menggunakan dua bahasa, yaitu bahasa daerah dan bahasa Indonesia. Dalam kehidupan sehari-hari, kedua bahasa ini digunakan sesuai dengan konteks yang dipandang relevan oleh pengguna bahasa. Tulisan ini berupaya menjelaskan, pada konteks apa saja bahasa Sunda dan bahasa Indonesia digunakan oleh masyarakat Plered, Purwakarta. Lokasi ini dipilih karena merupakan domisili para pedagang Sunda di wilayah yang sering dilalui oleh warga dari wilayah yang tidak berbahasa Sunda. Selain itu, diungkap pula latar belakang penggunaan tiap bahasa dalam konteks masing-masing. Melalui kajian ini, diungkap sikap masyarakat terhadap bahasa Sunda dan bahasa Indonesia. Kata kunci: bahasa sunda, bahasa indonesia, sikap terhadap bahasa Abstract Community Attitudes of Ceramics Creators and Traders towards Indonesian and Sundanes Language. Indonesian society in general is a community that is able to use two languages, the local language and the Indonesian language. In everyday life, the two languages are used in the context that is relevant to the user of the language. This paper attempts to explain, in which context are Sundanese and Indonesian languages are used by people in Plered, Purwakarta. This location was chosen because it is the residence of the Sundanese traders in areas frequently traveled by residents of the area who do not speak Sundanese. In addition, the background of the use of each language is also revealed in the context of each. Through this study, the attitudes of the community towards Sundanese and Indonesian are revealed. Keywords: sundanese, indonesian, attitudes towards language

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.049
Threshold uncertainty score0.121

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0040.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0360.006

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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.249
Teacher spread0.227 · 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
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJurnal Pendidikan Bahasa dan SastraSame topicLinguistics and Language AnalysisFrench-language works237,207