MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2612305326 · doi:10.1075/lplp.41.2.05har

Linguistic capital

2017· article· en· W2612305326 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueLanguage Problems & Language Planning · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicMultilingual Education and Policy
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLingua francaMedium of instructionCapital (architecture)ChinaLanguage policyFirst languageEnglish as a lingua francaLinguisticsCultural capitalPolitical scienceSociologyPedagogyHistorySocial sciencePhilosophyLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract This article discusses the effects of Hong Kong’s language policy changes in education since China reclaimed the territory in 1997. It describes Hong Kongers’ perceptions of English and their mother tongue Cantonese, and considers the effects of the Cantonese medium of instruction (CMI) policy, which was introduced to promote biliteracy and trilingualism 1 among Hong Kongers. The analysis shows that even though CMI results in deeper learning in Hong Kong students, the strength and status of English as the lingua franca in the territory remains strong, and access to the linguistic capital English brings remains restricted to those with financial capital to afford it.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.401
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0020.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.060
GPT teacher head0.460
Teacher spread0.399 · 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