MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2998761857 · doi:10.18192/olbiwp.v10i0.3828

Conversations autour du plurilinguisme. Théorisation du pluriel et pouvoir des langues

2020· article· fr· W2998761857 on OpenAlex

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.

venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueOLBI Journal · 2020
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicSecond Language Learning and Teaching
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTranslanguagingHumanitiesArtPhilosophySociologyLinguistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Tandis qu’on note depuis quelques années une floraison de concepts cherchant à mieux théoriser la complexité et le pluriel en didactique des langues, ces nouveaux termes ne servent-ils qu’à dépoussiérer ou remettre à la mode des notions antérieures ? Entrent-ils en conflit ou en résonance ? Et comment ?Cette contribution vise à poser quelques repères au sein d’un parcours situé, subjectif, à travers quelques jalons qui marquent la théorisation de la compétence plurilingue et pluri-/interculturelle (CPP) en Europe, notamment francophone. On discutera comment ces conceptualisations du plurilinguisme entrent en écho avec un autre concept du champ aujourd’hui largement circulant, celui de translanguaging. La contribution invite à resituer quelques espaces-temps du dialogue académique et invoque le pouvoir des langues dans la complexification conceptuelle. Mots-clés : plurilinguisme, compétence plurilingue et pluriculturelle, translanguaging, didactique du plurilinguisme

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.845
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0020.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0140.000

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 head0.029
GPT teacher head0.239
Teacher spread0.210 · 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