MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3117782542 · doi:10.30738/caraka.v7i1.8508

PENGGUNAAN BAHASA BAGI KELOMPOK IMIGRAN DI MAKASSAR: SUATU KAJIAN KONTAK BAHASA

2020· article· en· W3117782542 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Andi Samsu Rijal, Andi Mega Januarti Putri, Sulviana Sulviana, Andi Asdar

Bibliographic record

VenueCaraka Jurnal Ilmu Kebahasaan Kesastraan dan Pembelajarannya · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicLinguistics and Language Analysis
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Language contact is a verbal communication interaction at the same place and time. The phenomenon of language contact can be found in the city of Makassar, both the people of South Sulawesi themselves and immigrant groups from various Middle Eastern countries, where the city of Makassar is used as a temporary area before visiting the destination countries, namely Australia, Canada and America. Seeing the volume of immigrants from 2014 to 2019 living in Makassar, of course every day they interact with the people of Makassar City. The purpose of this article is to describe the use of language for immigrants in interacting with the people of Makassar. The method used is the method of observation and interviews. From the observations it was found that the use of English was only used to interact formally both to UNHCR officers, IOM staff, and to Makassar residents who greeted them in English, Indonesian was also used formally, but in daily interactions a variation of Makassar Malay was used ( BMM) such as when buying, selling, exercising, and other social adaptations. The use of BMM indicates that it is an adaptation effort for language and culture made by immigrant groups to be socially accepted in the Makassar city environment.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.014
Threshold uncertainty score0.036

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0040.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0110.002

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 head0.033
GPT teacher head0.227
Teacher spread0.193 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
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

Citations2
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCaraka Jurnal Ilmu Kebahasaan Kesastraan dan PembelajarannyaSame topicLinguistics and Language AnalysisFrench-language works237,207