Bibliographic record
Abstract
This minor master’s thesis discusses code-switching from English to French in The Montreal Gazette, the main English-language newspaper in the Canadian province of Quebec. The focus of the study is on marked code-switching, in which the usage of French acts as a metaphor or symbol of social relations instead of just filling pragmatic or lexical gaps of the English language. The purpose of the study is to examine whether English¬–French code-switching in the Quebec anglophone press is more motivated by solidarity towards or divergence from the francophone commu-nity, i.e. if code-switching is more positively or negatively motivated. \n \nThe corpus of the study consists of 481 opinion articles published in The Montreal Gazette from 1st March to 15th June 2019. After an initial spotting of code-switching by close-reading the articles, the Markedness Model by Carol Myers-Scotton was used to divide code-switches into marked and unmarked ones; thereaf-ter, context-based interpretation was used to divide marked code-switches into those motivated by solidarity and those motivated by divergence. In total, 61 articles, i.e. some 12.7 per cent of the whole corpus, include marked code-switching. This code-switching is motivated by solidarity in 20 articles and by divergence in 21 articles. Even though the difference in the prevalence of positively and negatively motivated code-switching is small, the latter is more coherent since French is employed to highlight lines of political and identity-related division in Quebec. A third, surpris-ing category consists of established French loanwords that are part of international English and that are used in a marked way. \n \nWhen the third category is added to the count of articles containing marked positively and negatively motivated code-switching, French is used for solidarity in 28 articles and for divergence in 37. First, the small number of proper code-switches arising from Quebec French suggests that the marked usage of French is rather mar-ginal in Quebec English. Second, the prevalence of markedly used, established French loanwords in the corpus suggests that international French has continued prestige in the Quebec anglophone community. Thus, it would be interesting to study whether established French loanwords are more common in Quebec English than in monolingually English-speaking communities.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.000 | 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".