Timbit, Javex and Zed: Do Canadians realize that they have a unique vocabulary?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Many Canadians feel that there is some difference between Canadian and American speech beyond simply the spelling of "colour," and linguistic research has confirmed that many vocabulary items, like poutine, eavestrough, and skate-a-thon, are found only in Canada. Although this topic has been popularized somewhat by books like Katherine Barber's Only in Canada, You Say, the extent to which Canadians are aware of the distinctness of their everyday vocabulary is still uncertain. This survey of 54 Queen's students, all native English-speaking Canadians age 24 and under, shows that real and false Canadianisms can be placed in categories based on meaning association and frequency of usage that correlate to the likelihood that respondents will judge them as "uniquely Canadian." Comparing identification and usage also reveals some intriguing characteristics of this demographic, including the decline of "chesterfield," contact with "francophones," and gender differences in food-related Canadianisms. This presentation will examine both specific examples and general trends found in the survey, as well as suggesting potential areas for further related study.
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 | 0.001 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.009 | 0.005 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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".