La réalisation du /r/ en Afrique Centrale : Une première exploration du français des locuteurs basaaphones (Cameroun)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
La présente étude constitue une première exploration de la variété de français parlée par un sous-groupe de locuteurs camerounais, les basaaphones. L’examen perceptif de 511 occurrences de /r/ provenant de deux locuteurs (parole lue et parole semi-spontanée) montre que plusieurs variantes sont employées dépendamment du contexte phonétique. Le R apical [ɾ] et le R dorsal [ʁ] ont tendance à alterner en position prévocalique, faisant de [ʁ] une variante forte dans cette variété de contact. Une vocalisation du R est observée en contexte postvocalique, et ce malgré le fait que le basaa autorise les syllabes (C)VC. Les groupes consonantiques C+R favorisent quant à eux la variante apicale, quelle que soit leur position dans la syllabe. Enfin, l’examen des répétitions d’un même mot montre qu’une forme de conditionnement lexical pourrait également déterminer le choix de certaines variantes (notamment [ʁ] vs. [ɾ] en position explosive).
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.001 |
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.
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".