MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2918068843 · doi:10.5539/ijel.v9n2p210

An Ethnographic Investigation of Code Switching and Mixing in Pakistan: A Case Study of Nine-Year Old Child, Alia

2019· article· en· W2918068843 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Jahangir Bhatti, Shabana Sartaj

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of English Linguistics · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicMultilingual Education and Policy
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNeuroscience of multilingualismCode-switchingUtteranceEthnographyLinguisticsFirst languagePerspective (graphical)PsychologyCode (set theory)Code-mixingDevelopmental psychologySociologyComputer scienceArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Bilingualism has special designation in learning of language especially in countries where English is second or third language. Bilingualism sketches the concept of a speaker that either mixes or switches two or different codes while making an utterance. In that perspective, the present study is designed as an ethnographic research to validate the notion of bilingual action of speech turning in Pakistan. This case study of nine year old child named Alia has been conducted to formulate the situation of bilingualism in multilingual society of Pakistan. In that regard the researcher recorded the dialogues of a child while taking part in different roles. The speech of the child was later analyzed to investigate the influence of bilingualism on it. The two languages were focused Urdu and English with the little extent of Punjabi code. Various reasons were researched for finding out the basic factors that led to switch or mix codes within an utterance. The parents of a child Alia were also interviewed that led to find specific factors of their child to code switch and mixes. The factors include bilingual environment, partners, mother tongue, social interactions and medium of education in school.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.027
Threshold uncertainty score0.055

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0110.005
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0020.004
Research integrity0.0020.003
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 head0.040
GPT teacher head0.438
Teacher spread0.398 · 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 designQualitative
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
Published2019
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of English Linguistics→Same topicMultilingual Education and Policy→French-language works237,207→