MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2889613648 · doi:10.15291/radovifilo.1840

Sociolingvistički status hrvatskih iseljenika u Quebecu

2018· article· hr· W2889613648 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Vjekoslav Ćosić

Bibliographic record

VenueRadovi Razdio filoloških znanosti · 2018
Typearticle
Languagehr
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicLinguistics, Language Diversity, and Identity
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesPhysicsArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Autor prikazuje rezultate ankete provedene u tri grada kanadske pokrajine Québec (Montreal, Québec, Sherbrook). Cilj je bio utvrditi osnovne karakteristike jezičnog ponašanja hrvatskih iseljenika u sredini koja je od nedavno (1977) de iure jednojezična a de facto već dva stoljeća dvojezična (pogotovo Montréal). Anketa (27 pitanja) obuhvatila je 59 ispitanika raznih dobi i zanimanja, svi pripadnici prve generacije osim 5 djece od 10-15 godina koji pripadaju drugoj generaciji. Svi ispitanici govore hrvatski ali ih 10 uopće ne govori, a 6 slabo francuski. Na radnom mjesto 35 ih govori francuski, najčešće u kombinaciji s engleskim koji je u 12 slučajeva jedini jezik posla. U obitelji 22 ispitanika govore samo hrvatski, 4 samo engleski, 1 samo francuski, ostalo je višejezično. U 13 od ukupno 17 anketiranih obitelji djeca govore hrvatski (od toga su 3 mješovita braka) a u 4 obitelji (sve mješoviti brakovi) ga ne govore. Vrlo česta trojezičnost (Montréal) ne pogoduje očuvanju materinskog jezika, što će posebno doći do izražaja u drugoj generaciji. Tu pojavu trebat će pažljivo pratiti i sistematski istražiti.

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 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)0.011
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Meta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies, Scholarly communication, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesScience and technology studies, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.188
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.011
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0030.003
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0180.011

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 head0.250
Teacher spread0.225 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

Study designNot applicable
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
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRadovi Razdio filoloških znanostiSame topicLinguistics, Language Diversity, and IdentityFrench-language works237,207