MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3096170659

Code-Switching among Trilingual Montrealers: French, English and a Heritage Language

2004· article· en· W3096170659 on OpenAlexaffabout
Ephie Konidaris

Bibliographic record

VenueDOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicLinguistic Variation and Morphology
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCode-switchingCode (set theory)Computer scienceHeritage languageLinguisticsNatural language processingProgramming languagePhilosophy
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

'Ibis study focuses on the concept of code-switching, which can be defined as the verbal strategy by which multilingual speakers change linguistic code(s) within the same speech event as a sign of cultural solidarity or distance and as an act of cultural identity. The participants partaking in this study are three trilingual persons living and working in Montreal. They possess linguistic competencies in the following three languages: English, French and Greek. This study is of particular interest due to the complexity of the socio-political, ethnic, and linguistic context of the setting which entails bilinguality (English and French) according to Canada's language laws, while Quebec's provincial laws profess to only one official language (French). In addition, the anecdotal fact that heritage languages of certain minority groups are maintained and widely utilized by members of the specific group in Montreal adds to the unique context in which the trilingual participants were brought up, and that in which they currently live. This study consists of an analysis of the codes (and code-switches) used in the participants' audio-taped conversation, obtained as data with consent and later transcribed for analysis.

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 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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScholarly communication, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.201
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.145
GPT teacher head0.530
Teacher spread0.385 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations4
Published2004
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals)Same topicLinguistic Variation and MorphologyFrench-language works237,207