MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4376605570 · doi:10.1515/eduling-2022-0015

Plurilingual Chinese learners of French Lx: agentic assembling of semiotic resources for learning

2023· article· en· W4376605570 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Sunny Man Chu Lau, Caroline Dault, Sarah Théberge

Bibliographic record

VenueEducational Linguistics · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicEFL/ESL Teaching and Learning
Canadian institutionsBishop's University
FundersBishop's University
KeywordsMultilingualismTranslanguagingLinguisticsLanguage acquisitionFirst languageLanguage educationSemioticsPsychologySociologyPedagogyMathematics education

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract This paper reports an interview study with Chinese international students in an Anglophone university in Quebec, Canada, exploring their use of language and cross-language learning strategies to support their learning of French Lx (third language and beyond). Drawing on plurilingualism, Dynamic Model of Multilingualism, and language learning strategies, this article examines how Chinese learners made dynamic, creative, and, at times, unexpected links among Chinese and other additional languages and mobilized previous learning and professional experience to strategically enhance their French language learning. As a logographic language, Chinese is typologically distant from Latin-based languages. The focal participants, however, generated multilingual, multidirectional, and multimodal connections among the languages they knew. Their agentic assemblage of communicative repertoires for language learning contests the abyssal thinking behind the deficit-oriented label of “allophones” (those whose mother tongue is neither French nor English) that is used widely in the country. The study urges teachers and researchers to rethink language pedagogies that respond to and take full advantage of these student-directed strategies for better learning. Particularly, the paper argues for greater attention to students of non-alphabetic language backgrounds to recognize and co-learn with them about these self-initiated plurilingual strategies in order to build on their metalinguistic resources and create equitable classroom spaces for more effective teaching and learning.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.017
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.789
Threshold uncertainty score0.991

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.017
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.040
GPT teacher head0.325
Teacher spread0.285 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designNot applicable
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

Citations3
Published2023
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEducational LinguisticsSame topicEFL/ESL Teaching and LearningFrench-language works237,207