MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4382489268 · doi:10.5539/ijel.v13n3p88

Socio-Pragmatic Study of Bani Hasan Tribe’s Proverbs and Dialectical Expressions in Jordan

2023· article· en· W4382489268 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Bilal Ayed Al-Khaza’leh

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of English Linguistics · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicLanguage, Linguistics, Cultural Analysis
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTribeLinguisticsPronunciationClanDialecticLexiconPsychologyMeaning (existential)SociologyAnthropologyPhilosophyEpistemology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Arabic dialects have a specific linguistic repertoire, cultural singularity and social privacy. The dialect is only understood by the people who daily use it. This study aims at shedding light on the proverbs and dialectical expressions used by Bani Hasan tribe (بني حسن) in Jordan. The primary aims were to investigate the Illocutionary force of the targeted proverbs and linguistic expressions based on speech acts theoretical framework. The data were collected from various individuals who represent the whole 13 clans of this tribe. The investigated data consist of 14 proverbs and 59 expressions. Findings showed that this tribe has some unique proverbs and lexemes. The illocutionary force of the proverbs are provided and well as the meaning and the pronunciation of the frequent idiomatic colloquial expressions were discussed. Analysis revealed that most of the proverbs have the pragmatic functions of giving advice and criticism. Findings could help others to have more knowledge about the lexicon of this tribe which helps to enforce the social bonds among the tribes of the Jordanian society.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
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: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.013
Threshold uncertainty score0.030

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0090.006
Scholarly communication0.0040.002
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.028
GPT teacher head0.295
Teacher spread0.267 · 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

Citations0
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of English Linguistics→Same topicLanguage, Linguistics, Cultural Analysis→French-language works237,207→