Multiculturalism in Canada : Symbolic Boundaries and the Institutionalization of Difference
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper explores how people are constructed into groups, and how these constructions are reinforced by the ideology of multiculturalism in Canada. I am primarily concerned with the metaphorical use of the border concept in the context of Multicultural Canada, and if and how the current ideology of multiculturalism reifies cultural distinctions and, in complex ways, contributes to divisiveness and disunity within Canada. The goal of Canada's Multicultural policy is integration via acceptance of difference. Yet, the principle or logic underlying the policy rests on the premise that cultural variation is discontinuous. Thus, Canadian multiculturalism's undue emphasis on cultural differences means that such differences, whether superficial or substantive, are abstracted into meaningful difference through the metaphorical extension of border concepts. As such, multiculturalism has left unchanged the structural organization of power in the cultural and political landscape of Canada.
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 | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.028 | 0.053 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.015 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.010 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| 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".