Plurilingualism and Language Contact in Friuli Venezia Giulia: The State of the Research
Bibliographic record
Abstract
As a crossroads between Eastern and Western Europe, throughout its history Friuli Venezia Giulia has always been a strategic political and economic site and has had several rulers (German patriarchs, Venetians, etc.). Consequently, the language of the ruling classes usually differed from that of the common people. Friulian was mostly considered the language of the lower classes and restricted to non-official and familiar circumstances. This attitude still persists today towards Italian, the official language, and some people feel uncomfortable using Friulian on official and formal occasions. Friulian speakers can, however, be considered bilingual speakers of Italian and Friulian. In fact, the use of Friulian, also in official contexts has always been an outstanding cultural and social issue which has raised very strong feelings both in favour of and against it. This essay presents and discusses plurilingualism and language contact in Friuli Venezia Giulia and focuses on the relations among the Friulian language and the other historical minorities (such as the Slovene and the German idioms) and the ‘new’ minorities (the so-called immigrant languages). It also describes the important language contact phenomena between Friulian and Italian which constitute an interesting sociolinguistic reality since the two languages are not always in opposition. The aim is to present a sociolinguistic study which wants to be a useful tool for measuring and assessing the state of languages in the Friulian community. It can also provide crucial information to those who are concerned with linguistic policy and planning, by offering hints that will enable them to develop appropriate actions within this protected territory.
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 | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.010 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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 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".