MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

LANGUAGE SITUATION AND LANGUAGE POLICY IN THE CANADIAN PROVINCE OF QUEBEC

2020· article· en· W3117876946 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
V.A. Kozhemyakina

Bibliographic record

VenueBulletin of Udmurt University Series History and Philology · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicLinguistic and Sociocultural Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsModernization theoryLanguage policyPoliticsEthnic groupNationalismSecularizationPopulationPeriod (music)Political scienceLanguage politicsEconomic historyPolitical economySociologyHistoryLawDemography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The article analyzes the language situation and language policy in the Canadian province of Quebec. The Federal and provincial laws on the language adopted in the second half of the XX century are analyzed and the situation in which the French language was in the province of Quebec is indicated. The sixties of the last century in Quebec is called the "quiet revolution", it was a period of profound social and political changes. The quiet revolution was peaceful, evolutionary, but it involved the entire population of the province. The "revolution" was accompanied by a change in the ethnic imbalance in the society, in which the both political and economic powers were in the hands of the English-speaking minority. Another important aspect was the modernization and secularization of the Franco-Canadian community and the rise of its standard of living up to the average level of Anglo-Canadians one. French-speaking Canadians who were at a lower stage of economic development, was on the edge of loosing their native language, which caused a strong rise of the nationalist movement in Quebec, which was directed by provincial authorities to rescue the Quebec version of the French language and improving socio-economic situation of the French speaking community.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.877
Threshold uncertainty score0.290

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.217
Teacher spread0.202 · 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.

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

Citations1
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBulletin of Udmurt University Series History and PhilologySame topicLinguistic and Sociocultural StudiesFrench-language works237,207