Chadian Learners’/Users’ Preferred Variety(ies) of English
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Although French and Arabic are the official languages of Chad, for the past twenty years Chadian learners and users of English have been having a strong interest in the language. Their number in Cameroonian, Nigerian, Ghanaian and Sudanese universities as well as in linguistic centres in N’Djamena testifies to this. It can be said that the petrol boom in the country has really changed the attitudes of Chadians towards English. They see in it the language of opening and opportunities. Given that in most major languages there are accents and variants, and most especially with English the lingua franca of the 21st century, it is important to know those learners’/users’ preferred variety (ies). This paper thus aims to know which variety (ies) of English Chadian learners/users prefer to hear or speak. The data was gathered through a questionnaire administered to 106 university students, 97 secondary school learners, 18 English language teachers and 29 workers of other sectors (N = 250). Results show that most Chadian learners/users prefer American or British English and a good percentage of them favour Ghanaian or Cameroon English.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
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".