Vitalité ethnolinguistique et construction identitaire
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Plusieurs recherches ont constaté que l’identité bilingue est une composante de plus en plus saillante de l’autodéfinition identitaire des jeunes francophones en situation minoritaire au Canada. S’agit-il d’un nouvel état identitaire sans conséquences pour la francité de ces jeunes ou est-ce une tendance qui reflète une vitalité décroissante de la francophonie canadienne? La présente étude empirique montre que l’identité bilingue ou l’hybridité identitaire s’inscrit sur une échelle continue allant d’une identité francodominante à une identité anglodominante. Sont également analysées les relations de l’identité bilingue à la vitalité des communautés francophones habitées et à la francité du développement psycholangagier des jeunes. L’étude conclut en montrant l’importance de la socialisation langagière dans la famille et à l’école pour compenser la faible vitalité ethnolinguistique des communautés francophones.
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 | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.013 | 0.033 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.008 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 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".