MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4395084103 · doi:10.1093/fmls/cqae022

How Literary Texts ‘Stage’ Code-Switching

2024· article· en· W4395084103 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueForum for Modern Language Studies · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicMedia, Communication, and Education
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsStage (stratigraphy)Code-switchingCode (set theory)LinguisticsHistoryArtLiteratureComputer scienceProgramming languagePhilosophyBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract This article explores the possibilities and limitations of the sociolinguistic notion of code-switching for the analysis of multilingual texts, in particular those belonging to literature as it is commonly understood (prose fiction, drama and poetry). In such (con)texts, I argue, code-switching is ‘staged’: produced rather than reproduced. Even when texts stage bilingual conversations with the aim of imitating real-life speech events, mimesis is mediated by the shift from spoken to written mode, which contrasts with the presence and proximity typical of (spoken) verbal interaction. While this mediation limits the applicability of sociolinguistic notions when discussing literary corpora, several examples from both North America (Junot Díaz, Gloria Anzaldúa and Ana Lydia Vega) and Europe (Lydie Salvayre, Ágota Kristóf, Franz Kafka and Leo Tolstoy) show how literary texts ‘stage’ code-switching.

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 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)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.715
Threshold uncertainty score0.641

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
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 head0.063
GPT teacher head0.407
Teacher spread0.344 · 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