MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4285092115 · doi:10.5430/wjel.v12n6p114

The Sociolinguistic Salience of Linguistic Variables in Najdi Arabic

2022· article· en· W4285092115 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Nasser Mohammed Alajmi, Abdullah Ghannam Alghannam

Bibliographic record

VenueWorld Journal of English Language · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicLinguistic Variation and Morphology
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersDeanship of Scientific Research, Prince Sattam bin Abdulaziz UniversityPrince Sattam bin Abdulaziz University
KeywordsSalience (neuroscience)SalientArabicLinguisticsConvergence (economics)Variation (astronomy)Variable (mathematics)PsychologyMathematicsComputer scienceCognitive psychologyArtificial intelligencePhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study examines the relative sociolinguistic salience of three linguistic variables in two Najdi dialects, the bedouin and sedentary dialects. The quantitative data elicited from sociolinguistic interviews in Alajmi (2019) shows that bedouins are converging on the sedentary dialect, to varying degrees across the variables. The aim of this study is to test whether the sociolinguistic salience of the variables is the reason why there is variation in the level of convergence. Three methods have been used to measure the relative salience of the variables, the Social Category Association Test (SCAT), dialect identification task and multiple interviewers. The data from all three methods agree with the level of convergence in the production data (Alajmi, 2019). The variable that shows high level of convergence to the sedentary variant was found to be salient, while the other variables which show low levels of convergence were not salient.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.014

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.012
GPT teacher head0.293
Teacher spread0.281 · 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

Citations2
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueWorld Journal of English LanguageSame topicLinguistic Variation and MorphologyFrench-language works237,207