MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3185402864 · doi:10.4000/linx.8148

Un déclin différé : trajectoires de deux traits conservateurs du français québécois au cours du 20e siècle

2021· article· fr· W3185402864 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Hugo Saint-Amant Lamy

Bibliographic record

VenueLinx · 2021
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicLinguistic Variation and Morphology
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesPolitical scienceArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Cet article documente l’abandon, au Québec, de deux traits conservateurs du système sonore du français : la variante antérieure de la diphtongue -oi (ex. poire [pwɛʁ]) et le maintien d’un contraste phonémique entre /e/ et /ɛ/ devant /ʁ/ (ex. père [peʁ], paire [pɛʁ]). Ces deux traits, critiqués dans le discours normatif français dès les 17e et 18e siècles, auront persisté au Québec jusqu’au tournant du 21e siècle, rendant possible une analyse acoustique de leur déclin. À partir de données orales recueillies auprès de 152 témoins nés entre 1872 et 1997, une chronologie des processus est établie et les facteurs les conditionnant sont identifiés. Les résultats obtenus suggèrent que l’abandon des deux traits de prononciation commence vers le milieu du 19e siècle, au moment où l’intelligentsia canadienne-française, après sept décennies d’isolement, reprend contact avec les normes linguistiques hexagonales. Les schémas géographiques qui émergent des données mettent en lumière le rôle non-négligeable qu’un discours normatif explicite peut avoir sur le rythme de diffusion de nouvelles formes de prestige et l’abandon de formes anciennes tombées en défaveur.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.150
Threshold uncertainty score0.302

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0030.003
Scholarly communication0.0030.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.001

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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.264
Teacher spread0.247 · 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 designObservational
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
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueLinxSame topicLinguistic Variation and MorphologyFrench-language works237,207