MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2995317179 · doi:10.1017/9781108349406.021

Unearthing the Diachrony of World Englishes

2019· book-chapter· de· W2995317179 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Magnus Huber

Bibliographic record

VenueCambridge University Press eBooks · 2019
Typebook-chapter
Languagede
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicLinguistic Variation and Morphology
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsWorld EnglishesLinguisticsVarieties of EnglishSection (typography)HistoryOld EnglishComputer sciencePhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This chapter mainly focuses on research into the history of standard varieties of English in Kachru’s Inner and Outer Circles. There is a long research tradition relating to the diachrony of the two major Inner Circle varieties of British and American English but it is only since about 2000 that there has been a growing number of diachronic studies on the other mother-tongue Englishes, spoken in Ireland, Canada, Australia, and New Zealand. Interest in the historical development of Outer Circle varieties (the so-called New Englishes) is even more recent, with most studies emphasizing the external history of these Englishes. Investigations of the development of linguistic structure are very rare indeed, especially regarding spoken English. One section of this chapter outlines models of the evolution of World Englishes (WEs) and their implications for research. There are also sections on existing corpora that can be used in researching the history of WEs as well as on ongoing corpus compilation and the difficulties such projects meet. Finally, the usefulness of scattered, individual early data for the reconstruction of earlier stages of WEs is illustrated.

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)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.018

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.004
Science and technology studies0.0020.008
Scholarly communication0.0050.012
Open science0.0000.002
Research integrity0.0010.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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 head0.028
GPT teacher head0.228
Teacher spread0.200 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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

Citations17
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCambridge University Press eBooksSame topicLinguistic Variation and MorphologyFrench-language works237,207