MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3136519381 · doi:10.1353/tfr.2012.0280

Hétérogénéité et homogénéité dans les pratiques langagières: mélanges offerts à Denise Deshaies by Wim Remysen, Diane Vincent

2012· article· fr· W3136519381 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Carole Salmon

Bibliographic record

Venue˜The œFrench review · 2012
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicLinguistics and Discourse Analysis
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLinguisticsVerbContext (archaeology)TerminologyNarrativeInfinitiveHistorySociologyPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

From a pedagogical perspective, the TOE may be too abstract to be of practical value for teachers of French. At the same time, although the analyses are theoretically dense, one gains invaluable insights into certain structures that will facilitate teaching them, even at lower levels. Topics include the historical/ narrative present; the distinction between être en train de + infinitive (in a past context) and the imparfait of a full verb; and the temporal or serial status of puis (versus ensuite and et puis). A single article relates directly to second language acquisition and pedagogy; Barbazan demonstrates that due to cognitive processes and memory function, a significant disconnect exists between learners’ acquisition of tense-aspect-modal structures and their understanding of the metalinguistic explanations of these structures. In the end, however, this article is disappointing, because the author offers no proposals to address this important problem in the classroom. The articles present some important challenges and contain a few weaknesses. For example, one must slog through the daunting technical, though generally well explained, terminology involved in the TOE and reread, if unfamiliar with the TOE, the more precise and detailed arguments multiple times; the figures in Bres’s offering lack sufficient keys to interpret them; several significant typographical and/or editing errors in two of the articles (Bres; Patard and Vermeulen ) cause considerable confusion and require the reader to struggle to discern the authors’ intentions; one analysis has far more to do with Polish than French; and the depth and breadth of articles is somewhat uneven. Despite these drawbacks, however, readers with an interest in tense, aspect, and modality will find most of the articles in this volume enlightening and worthwhile. Syracuse University (NY) Constance L. Dickey REMYSEN, WIM, et DIANE VINCENT, éd. Hétérogénéité et homogénéité dans les pratiques langagières: mélanges offerts à Denise Deshaies. Québec: PU de Laval, 2010. ISBN 978-2-7637-9025-1. Pp. 226. $30 Can. Visant avant tout un public averti, cet ouvrage collectif de la collection Langue française en Amérique du nord, dirigé par Remysen et Vincent, met à l’honneur la sociolinguiste Denise Deshaies, de l’Université Laval, qui a consacré sa carrière à l’étude du français parlé dans la ville de Québec, mais aussi ailleurs. Les lecteurs apprécieront l’introduction des deux éditeurs en forme d’hommage, qui retrace la brillante carrière de la chercheuse depuis 1975. L’introduction est ponctuée d’extraits d’une entrevue avec Deshaies, enregistrée par Remysen en 2009, sous le prétexte d’une étude sur l’évolution de la discipline, ce qui la rend très personnelle et intéressante. Elle est suivie par l’impressionnante liste de ses publications et communications, ainsi que des mémoires de maîtrise et thèses de doctorat que la chercheuse a dirigés durant trente-cinq ans, et qui confirment l’impact fondamental que ses travaux ont eu dans le domaine de la sociolinguistique ayant la langue française sous toutes ses formes pour objet d’étude. Ce florilège réunit les contributions d’une dizaine de chercheurs en sociolinguistique qui ont collaboré d’une façon ou d’une autre avec Deshaies au cours de leurs études ou de leur carrière. L’organisation du volume repose sur deux principes directeurs: d’une part, donner la parole aux anciens étudiants formés Reviews 1003 par Deshaies et d’autre part, rendre compte de la grande variété de ses centres d’intérêt en matière de recherche. Ce choix, clairement expliqué par les éditeurs, permet aux lecteurs de mieux apprécier la variété des sujets abordés et renforce la cohésion du volume dans son ensemble, ce qui est toujours un défi pour un ouvrage collectif dont la nature même tend plutôt à l’éclatement qu’à l’unité. Afin de donner la parole à la principale intéressée, c’est un article de Deshaies sur l’homogène et l’hétérogène dans le français des adolescents et des adultes de la ville de Québec, l’un de ses projets les...

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)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.050
Threshold uncertainty score0.099

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0050.012
Scholarly communication0.0090.007
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0040.007
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.044
GPT teacher head0.302
Teacher spread0.258 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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

Citations0
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venue˜The œFrench reviewSame topicLinguistics and Discourse AnalysisFrench-language works237,207