Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The present study sets out to explore the mandative subjunctive in Canadian English (CanE), vs. its potential epicentre American English (AmE), and its historical input variety British English (BrE) based on a quantitative variationist analysis of the Strathy Corpus of Canadian English (Strathy), the Corpus of Contemporary American English (COCA), and the British National Corpus (BNC). The relevance of this contribution primarily stems from the fact that no previous research has yet focused on a contrastive comparison between CanE and its alleged epicentres, namely ‘a model of English for (neighbouring?) countries’ (Hundt, 2013, p. 185), and that the new method of Variation‐Based Distance and Similarity Modeling (VADIS) has so far never been applied to research in this field. Key findings show that VADIS is indeed a valuable method in detecting epicentral constellations, and pinpoint fruitful suggestions regarding AmE's alleged transnational influence on its neighbor, as well as cross‐border and transoceanic dis/similarities concerning the subject under analysis.
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 | 0.005 | 0.035 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.006 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".