Bibliographic record
Abstract
Globalization has transformed English from a foreign language into a lingua franca. The pragmatic paradigm and pragmatic features of English as a lingua franca (ELF), are different from those of native English, especially in the business context, defined as English as a business lingua franca (BELF), which has contributed to a series of studies on pragmatic competence, pragmatic strategies and pragmatic awareness in the (B)ELF context. Relevant studies offer insights into the pragmatic competence of BELF users, which is crucial in the accomplishment of communicative goals in business settings. This paper first reviews relevant theoretical studies on (B)ELF and evaluates their characteristics from the perspective of pragmatics. Then, the focus is placed upon the diversified features of interpersonal pragmatic competence and intercultural pragmatic competence in the BELF context, revealing that the traditional paradigm of pragmatic competence based on native English does not apply to this diversified intercultural context. This paper argues for a re-conceptualization of pragmatic competence in the BELF context and a re-examination of the institutional features of BELF interactions and the dynamics of pragmatic competence, pragmatic strategies, and pragmatic awareness in this context.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.051 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 teacher head, 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".