English, Scots and Germans compared: British and continental perspectives
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The English ethnic associationalism we describe in this book was not unique; indeed, it was part of a world of associations. Providing a comparative context is therefore crucial. Chapter 6 charts the evolution and purpose of those ethnic clubs and societies established in North America by other migrant groups. We focus particularly on Scots and Germans and explore the beginnings of the associational culture of these groups. The Scots were the most active in the early phase of settlement, also anchoring their associationalism in philanthropy. St Andrew’s societies, much as those of St George, had an elite dimension, but catered for a broader migrant cohort—those in distress. Similarities in the work of the two organisations even led to concrete co-operation. From the mid-nineteenth century onwards, however, the Scots developed a second and distinct tier: an ethnic associational culture at the heart of which lay sport. This contributed to a significant proliferation in Scottish ethnic associational activity—though one that was trumped, in the early twentieth century—by the Scottish mutualist branches in both the US and Canada (Order of Scottish Clans and the Sons of Scotland respectively). We also develop non-British/Irish comparators through an examination of developments in the German immigrant community in North America to establish to what extent language was a factor in immigrant adjustment to new world realities. Examining the Germans will also permit consideration of how external developments—in this case particularly the First and Second World Wars—were watersheds that united British Isle migrants, while casting out Germans and the more militant wings of the Irish.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.006 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 0.001 |
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.
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".