Revitalisation des Langues Minoritaires par les Médias: Étude de Quelques Stratégies de Promotion des Langues Autochtones au Canada*
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Les medias contribuent de facon decisive a la revitalisation des langues dans le monde. La radio et la television promeuvent la langue parlee, les journaux la langue ecrite et l’internet les deux. Ces medias peuvent en effet aider a la standardisation des langues minoritaires ainsi qu’au changement de la perception et des attitudes linguistiques et culturelles par rapport a ces langues. A ce propos, Albo a pu ecrire: « Present in the landscape and in the intimacy of every home, [the media] shape values, attitudes and even identities, like a fine rain that eventually penetrates the being’s every pore » (cite par Marti et al. 2005 : 181). Au Canada plus particulierement, les medias autochtones, surtout la presse ecrite, existent depuis la fin du 19e siecle. A la fin des annees 1980, le pays compte deja « 17 entreprises autochtones de communications engagees dans la radio, la television et la presse ecrite et visant a offrir aux autochtones le reflet de leurs experiences de vie, domaine neglige par les grands medias » (Raudsepp, 2014). Ces entreprises contribuent, tant bien que mal, a la visibilite des langues autochtones et des cultures dont elles sont les supports, accroissant ainsi leur vitalite. L’objectif de cet article, qui s’inscrit dans le cadre theorique de l’amenagement linguistique, notamment l’amenagement de l’acquisition et du statut tel que le comprennent Cooper (1989) et Tollefson (1991), est donc d’examiner succinctement et de facon critique la revitalisation des langues minoritaires par la radio, la television, la presse ecrite et le multimedia.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.014 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".