MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4390829856 · doi:10.5430/wjel.v14n2p230

Linguistic Landscape in the Tourist Area, Lembang Bandung, Indonesia

2024· article· en· W4390829856 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Yasir Mubarok, Dadang Sudana, Zamzam Nurhuda, Dewi Yanti

Bibliographic record

VenueWorld Journal of English Language · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicMultilingual Education and Policy
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersLembaga Pengelola Dana Pendidikan
KeywordsLinguistic landscapeIndonesianTourismLinguisticsRealmGeographyArchaeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study investigates the linguistic landscape of Lembang, Bandung, Indonesia. The field site is situated in a region distinguished by the longstanding presence of diverse cultures and a high degree of multilingualism. This study employed photographs as the primary data source to gather samples from the tourist area of Lembang. The research methodology employed in this study involved the use of photographs. The data presented demonstrate the presence of multiple dimensions that characterize the linguistic landscape of a tourist area. The 83 photographs reveal the language distribution of the Lembang LL. There are three public signs discernible from the language usage of LL signs: monolingual, bilingual, and multilingual. The linguistic landscape in Lembang LL demonstrates a complex interplay of sociopolitical and economic factors, resulting in a multifaceted phenomenon. The results indicate that Indonesian, as the sole national and official language of the country, occupies a prominent position on all signs. English is recognized as the second most significant language in Indonesia, following Indonesian, and is widely used as a means of international communication. Nevertheless, it is regrettable that Sundanese is not predominantly utilized, particularly within the economic realm or business world in the Lembang region. The aforementioned findings indicate that English and Indonesian in Lembang possess both symbolic and commercial significance. Furthermore, the linguistic landscape (LL) in Lembang progressively transforms into a commodified entity.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
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 score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.024

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.382
Teacher spread0.356 · 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

Citations3
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueWorld Journal of English LanguageSame topicMultilingual Education and PolicyFrench-language works237,207