English-French Language Contacts in Canada: Code Switching and Code Mixing
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The paper describes English-French language contacts in Canada and discusses the main strategies of the modern language policy in relation to the French language in Canada. The approaches to the definition of language interference, code mixing and code switching were studied. The research aims to identify the characteristics of code mixing and code switching in the English-French language pair in written and oral sources in terms of their grammatical expression and functional content. Scientific novelty of the research lies in investigating the reasons for code switching/mixing in the English-French language pair in the situation of state bilingualism in Canada and determining the grammatical and lexical features of code switching/mixing for languages belonging to different language groups, which contributes to the development of language contact theory. The research findings have shown that despite the fact that oral speech is characterised by lack of motivation, spontaneity, emotivity in code mixing and written speech is characterised by motivation and functionality, the grammatical expression of lexical units from the embedded language in the matrix language occurs according to similar principles for oral and written speech.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.017 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 it