MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W321868120

Das Kaschubische: Sprachtod Oder Revitalisierung? Empirische Studien Zur Ethnolinguistischen Vitalität Einer Sprachminderheit in Polen

2007· article· de· W321868120 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Slavonic Papers · 2007
Typearticle
Languagede
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicLanguage and Culture
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSlavic languagesEthnic groupGermanHumanitiesSociologyVitalityAnthropologyHistoryLinguisticsClassicsArtPhilosophyTheology
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Marlena Porebska. Das Kaschubische: Sprachtod oder Revitalisierung? Empirische Studien zur ethnolinguistischen Vitalitat einer Sprachminderheit in Polen. Slavistische Beitrage, 452. Munich: Verlag Otto Sagner, 2006. 272 pp. Maps. Tables. Bibliography. Index of Tables. Appendix (questionnaire and list of variables). euro26.00, paper.Written in German and titled Kashubian: Language Death or Revitalization? Empirical Studies on the Ethnolinguistic Vitality of Linguistic Minority in Poland, this book is the published version of doctoral dissertation submitted by Marlena Porebska the faculty of the Institute of Slavic Studies at the Friedrich Alexander University of Erlangen-Nuremberg. It presents the results of questionnaire-based fieldwork conducted by the author (a learner of Kashubian) in 2003 and 2005. It is perhaps the first comprehensive, book-length study of since the publication of the volume Kaszubszczyzna/Kaszebizna (edited by Edward Breza) in the series Najnowsze dzieje jezykow slowianskich by the University of Opole (Poland) in 2001.Porebska seeks determine here the of the ethnolect and the speech community on the basis of criteria put forth in an essay by H. Giles, R. Bourhis, and D. Taylor, Towards Theory of Language in Ethnic Group Relations, in Language, Ethnicity andlntergroup Relations (H. Giles, ed. London, 1977, pp. 307-348). Ethnolinguistic vitality is defined as which makes group likely behave as distinctive and active collective entity in intergroup situations (Giles et al., p. 308, cited by Porebska, p. 28). It is measured on 5-point scale of high, medium-high, medium, medium-low, and rankings. Factors considered in determining ethnolinguistic vitality include demography (both numerical and distributional), institutional support and control (education, culture, religion, mass media, etc.), and status (socio-historical, economic, social, and linguistic [both local and international]). The overall vitality of Anglo-American, for example, is rated high; that of Canadian French-medium-high; and that of Welsh-medium (p. 25). Porebska concludes that the overall ethnolinguistic vitality of is likewise medium (pp. 76-77). Although for most Kashubes still exists only as spoken language (p. 104; codified literary language remains in statu nascendi more than 160 years since the initial creation of alphabet in 1843 [p. 47]), Porebska believes that her prove that transmission of the language from one generation the next has not been interrupted and that Kashubian is far from dying out (p. 77; translation mine-GHT). She does not, however, inquire into the actual quality or degree of Kashubian's intergenerational transmission.Readers seeking learn the current number of Kashubian-speakers will be disappointed by this book. Although Porebska accepts the view that there are around 368,000 ethnic Kashubes and 119,000 semi-Kashubes in Poland today (p. 57), she stops short of estimating the number of people who actually speak Kashubian. Here the figures vary wildly: among the 32 estimates of the number of Kashubes and/or Kashubian-speakers cited by Porebska, those published after 1990 range from low of 4,500 speakers high of 350,000 (p. 56). According the Internet Web site UNESCO Red Book of Endangered Languages. Europe first compiled by Tapani Salminen in 1993 (), has only a few thousand speakers; reports of over 100,000 speakers are false and based on the number of ethnic Kashubians, [the] great majority of whom speak regional variant of Polish (Web p. 17). In stark contrast, Brunon Synak, in his contribution the above-mentioned Kaszubszczyzna/Kaszebizna volume, persists in citing doubtless highly inflated estimate of 250,000-300,000 speakers of that another scholar proposed as long ago as 1990; even so, Synak himself feels the need to underscore the conjectural nature of these data (podkreslic szacunkowy charakter tych danych-Wspotczesne funkcjonowanie kaszubszczyzny in Breza, ed. …

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Research integrity, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.745
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.331
Teacher spread0.313 · 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