MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2603728984

«Το Σάββατον εννα χαρτώσουμεν το κίτσ ιν»: British Cypriot Greek as a heritage language

2015· other· en· W2603728984 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Πέτρος Καρατσαρέας

Bibliographic record

VenueWestminsterResearch (University of Westminster) · 2015
Typeother
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCyprus History, Politics, Society
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsImmigrationEthnic groupPopulationHistoryLinguisticsRepertoireSpeech communityHeritage languageSociologyLiteratureArtDemographyAnthropologyArchaeology
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Since the early 20th century, the United Kingdom has been home to a sizeable Greek Cypriot community, whose population is presently estimated to fall between 200,000 and 300,000 individuals (Christodoulou-Pipis 1991; National Federation of Cypriots in the UK, accessed on 11 February 2015). The members of the Greek Cypriot parikia share a rich linguistic repertoire, which—in addition to English—features an array of forms of Cypriot Greek ranging from basilectal to acrolectal varieties along the continuum defined by Κατσογιάννου et al. (2006) and Tsiplakou et al. (2006). As is often the case with diasporas, however, the parikia does not form a homogenous speech community in that not all of its members have an equally good command of Cypriot Greek (or English, for that matter). Rather, different types of both monolingual and bilingual speakers can be found.\n\nHere, I focus on one particular type of Cypriot Greek bilingual that has recently begun to draw significant attention in the literature: heritage speakers (see Benmamoun et al. 2013; Montrul 2008; Polinsky & Kagan 2007). Heritage speakers are British-born second-generation immigrants, i.e. the children of first-generation immigrants who were born in Cyprus. They grew up acquiring Cypriot Greek at home until they started school at which time they started acquiring English. Gradually, they became more fluent in the latter, limiting the use of the former to the interaction with family and friends from the same ethnic background. Research on other heritage languages has shown that this acquisitional trajectory is expected to affect the heritage speakers’ competence in Cypriot Greek with inflectional morphology, both nominal and verbal, considered one of the most vulnerable grammatical domains in that connection.\n\nMy aim in this paper is to test the predictions of the heritage linguistics literature by examining the nominal morphology of heritage speakers of British Cypriot Greek. I specifically look at gender, number and case agreement between nouns and such targets as articles, adjectives, pronouns, participles and numerals in the speech data collected by means of sociolinguistic interviews from 20 speakers who were born and still live in areas of north London with high concentrations of Greek Cypriots (Harringay, Wood Green, Palmers Green, Edmonton). The results indicate that, contrary to the expectations of the literature, the agreement system of Cypriot Greek heritage speakers shows no signs of erosion or even deviation from that of non-heritage Cypriot Greek. In the collected data, all agreement targets appear in the expected inflected form with respect to the specification of their controller for gender, number and case. Possible explanations for these findings are proposed including the early age of acquisition of nominal agreement in Greek (2;10, according to Stephany 1997), late exposure and shift to English as well as sustained use of the heritage language within the parikia in adult life.\n\nReferences\nBenmamoun, Elabbas, Montrul, Silvina & Maria Polinsky. 2013. Heritage languages and their speakers: opportunities and challenges for linguists. Theoretical Linguistics 39(3/4), 129–181.\n\nChristodoulou-Pipis, Irina. 1991. Greek Outside Greece: Language Use by Greek-Cypriots in Britain. Nicosia: Diaspora Books.\n\nΚατσογιάννου, Μαριάννα, Παπαπαύλου, Ανδρέας, Παύλου, Παύλος & Σταυρούλα Τσιπλάκου. 2006. Διδιαλεκτικές κοινότητες και γλωσσικό συνεχές: η περίπτωση της κυπριακής. In Mark Janse, Brian D. Joseph & Angela Ralli (Eds.), Proceedings of the 2nd International Conference of Modern Greek Dialects and Linguistic Theory, Mytilene, Greece, 30 September – 3 October 2004, 156–171. Patras: University of Patras.\n\nMontrul, Silvina A. 2008. Incomplete Acquisition in Bilingualism: Re-examining the Age Factor. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins.\n\nPolinsky, Maria & Olga Kagan. 2007. Heritage languages: in the ‘wild’ and in the classroom. Languages and Linguistics Compass 1(5), 368–395.\n\nStephany, Ursula. 1997. The acquisition of Greek. In Dan Isaac Slobin (Ed.), The Crosslinguistic Study of Language Acquisition: Volume 4, 183–333. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.\n\nTsiplakou, Stavroula, Papapavlou, Andreas, Pavlou, Pavlos & Marianna Katsoyannou. 2006. Levelling, koineization and their implications for bidialectism. In Frans L. \n\nHinskens (Eds.), Language Variation – European Perspectives: Selected Papers from the Third International Conference on Language Variation in Europe (ICLaVE 3), Amsterdam, June 2005, 265–279. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins.

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)0.001
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: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.318
Threshold uncertainty score0.633

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0040.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.001

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 head0.033
GPT teacher head0.309
Teacher spread0.276 · 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
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueWestminsterResearch (University of Westminster)Same topicCyprus History, Politics, SocietyFrench-language works237,207