MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2774317982 · doi:10.7202/1042268ar

Le lexique nordique des jeunes Manitobains : constantes et variations sociolinguistiques dans le vocabulaire fondamental désignant les animaux

2017· article· fr· W2774317982 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Liliane Rodriguez

Bibliographic record

VenueCahiers franco-canadiens de l Ouest · 2017
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicMilitary, Security, and Education Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Winnipeg
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesArtPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Ce que l’on appelle le vocabulaire fondamental (ou lexique disponible) des jeunes forme le socle sémantique sur lequel se construit, au fil des ans, le lexique du locuteur adolescent puis adulte, voire l’imaginaire de l’écrivain. Ce vocabulaire est fondamental car il s’acquiert jusqu’à l’âge de treize ans, pour désigner les objets de notre expérience immédiate du monde: les vêtements, les jeux, l’école, les animaux, etc. Nos enquêtes, réalisées en douze communautés du Manitoba entre 1990 et 2006, montrent que la notion sémantique du Nord occupe une place récurrente dans le vocabulaire fon-damental des jeunes Franco-Manitobains. Extraits des corpus lexicométriques établis par des méthodes de statistique lexicale sur les données de ces enquêtes, nos exemples, ici, proviennent du champ lexico-sémantique «Les animaux» (le champ de la faune). Les indices de disponibilité de ces mots (leur usage réel, et non une simple compréhension passive) ont été calculés selon deux paramètres sociolinguistiques: urbain/rural et fille/garçon. Ces indices convergent, mettant en évidence la forte représentation lexicométrique d’une expérience nordique vécue (ours, carcajou, etc.) par rapport à la faible représentation de référents lointains (girafe, éléphant, etc.) dans le développement du lexique, de la mémoire sémantique et de l’imaginaire des jeunes Manitobains.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.188
Threshold uncertainty score0.377

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0040.006
Science and technology studies0.0030.003
Scholarly communication0.0040.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.301
Teacher spread0.275 · 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 designObservational
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
Published2017
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCahiers franco-canadiens de l OuestSame topicMilitary, Security, and Education StudiesFrench-language works237,207