Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Although Canada is reputed for being a multicultural society, Canadians’ opinions vary regarding the extent to which multiculturalism should be promoted. Examining metaphorical language in discourse about multiculturalism may reveal which metaphors are typically used to endorse it and which ones are typically used to express a more skeptical stance. This study analyzed 646 opinion pieces regarding multiculturalism published in Canadian newspapers. Linguistic metaphors were identified and then grouped under themes. The texts were categorized according to the authors’ stance, and instantiations of the metaphor themes were tallied to determine if some occur more frequently in discourse that promotes multiculturalism compared to discourse that expresses reservations. Some metaphor themes were instantiated more often either in texts painting a positive picture of multicultural society (e.g., a multicultural society is a varied, multi-component work of art or craft ) or in ones expressing reservations (e.g., multiculturalism is a destabilizing or divisive force ). Such contrasts were nonetheless attenuated by the way a single metaphor theme can be used to serve different rhetorical purposes. It also appears that writers are not always aware of the entailments of the metaphors they use, especially if these are conventionalized phrases.
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 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".