Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study is designed to investigate strategies used by Cameroon French speakers to respond to gratitude expressions. Principles from three theoretical frameworks, i.e., cross-cultural pragmatics, the conception of French as a pluricentric language and postcolonial pragmatics were used to guide the study. The study was based on data from 148 French-speaking Cameroonian university students using a Data completion task questionnaire. The analysis focused on the pragmatic functions, realization patterns, and situational distribution of thanks response strategies as well as on supportive acts used to modify thanks responses. The results indicate five groups of thanks response strategies emerging from the corpus and the most common strategies used by the respondents are those intended to mitigate or even negate the magnitude of the favor. The findings also show that thanks response strategies are realized in different ways and that they are distributed differently across the three situations retained for this study. It was also found that thanks responses occur either as single acts or as combinations of many acts. The supportive acts attested in the data are employed to mitigate or intensify thanks responses, and to save or enhance the faces of the speaker and/or the addressee. The limitations of the study’s findings are highlighted, and avenues for future research outlined.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".