MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4228999515 · doi:10.1515/applirev-2022-2016

Designing new Korean mothers, daughters-in-law, and wives: an analysis of Korean textbooks for newly arrived marriage migrants in South Korea

2022· article· en· W4228999515 on OpenAlexaff
Bong-gi Sohn

Bibliographic record

VenueApplied Linguistics Review · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicGender Studies in Language
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNationalismGender studiesWifeSocializationImmigrationSociologyPoliticsSociocultural evolutionRepresentation (politics)State (computer science)Identity (music)EthnographySettlement (finance)Political scienceLawSocial science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Textbooks are sociocultural materials, reflecting political decisions, educational beliefs and priorities, cultural realities and language policies. As part of a larger ethnographic study which investigated the multilingual socialization of foreign wives in South Korea, I present the nature and extent of the gender-making process through an analysis of Korean textbooks for recently arrived female marriage migrants, which provides an understanding of the extent to which gender and race are ingrained in shaping linguistic nationalism in globalized times. I first introduce a four-stage life cycle designed by the South Korean government and situate Korean textbook series called Korean Language Learning With International Marriage Migrant Women as an intervention used early in the settlement period for foreign mothers. Then, I analyze the textual and multimodal representation of family identities taken from six textbook series, focusing on lessons, dialogues, and characters that are presented. The results of the study demonstrate how the state presents its attempts to transform foreign wives into a new type of ‘wise mother good wife’ in the globalized, multilingual world. I demonstrate the ways in which state-driven gender identity production is not simply (re)producing the gender divide but also aligned with nation-making processes that are facing challenges in these globalized times.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.019

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0030.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.040
GPT teacher head0.326
Teacher spread0.286 · 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 designQualitative
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
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueApplied Linguistics ReviewSame topicGender Studies in LanguageFrench-language works237,207