Making “Second Generation,” Inflicting Linguistic Injuries: An Ethnography of a Mainland Chinese Church in Canada
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Based on a larger ethnography, this article explores intergenerational relationships between First-Generation Immigrants and Second-Generation youth and focuses on psychological damages (Piller, 2016), particularly linguistic injuries, within a new mainland Chinese church in Canada. Specifically, I show why Second-Generation young people were largely separated into the English congregation, with little support from the parent generation in the Mandarin congregation. Drawing on language and non-language ideologies (Bucholtz, 2001) and semiotic processes of differentiation (Irvine & Gal, 2000), particularly fractal recursivity, focusing on relevant practices and discourses, I analyze and delineate linguistic injuries suffered and perpetuated by First- and Second-Generation members. Exploring their origins and manifestations, I tentatively define linguistic injuries as psychological damages caused by judgement based on language or language use at the interpersonal and institutional levels, but originated from “structures” such as ideology and legislation. Implications and future directions of this research are discussed.
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.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 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 it