Chinese heritage language maintenance: a grandparents' perspective
Bibliographic record
Abstract
With the increased mobility of today's world, trans-border migration has become a common phenomenon. Immigrants bring their heritage languages and cultures to the host countries. The issue of heritage language maintenance becomes more and more significant. However, the issue has not received much research attention until recently and various research questions remain unanswered. This study attempts to fill a research gap by investigating the influence of Chinese grandparents on the Chinese development and maintenance of their preschool-aged grandchildren during their stays in Montreal. Since it is a very common Chinese cultural tradition that grandparents take care of their grandchildren as primary caregivers both inside China and abroad, it can be assumed that Chinese grandparents have an influence on the Chinese development and maintenance of their grandchildren. However, due to the paucity of the research, factors such as what the grandparents' attitude are toward Chinese maintenance, how they are involved in the Chinese development and maintenance of their grandchildren, and what their influence on the Chinese maintenance is, are not well understood. Adopting a qualitative research methodology, this study attempts to explore the role of Chinese grandparents in the Chinese development and maintenance of their preschool-aged grandchildren in Montreal, Canada. Analysis of interviews with the Chinese grandparents and parents provided evidence that the Chinese grandparents played a significant role in the Chinese development and maintenance of their grandchildren. The grandparents helped their grandchildren acquire oral and initial literacy skills. The role of Chinese grandparents as educating agents was of great importance to their grandchildren's development and maintenance of Chinese as a heritage language. These research findings have important implications for Chinese maintenance as a heritage langua
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 | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.009 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".