MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4398773919 · doi:10.1093/jrs/feae029

‘If I Knew How to Speak English…’: How language shapes refugee mothers’ perceptions of past, present, and future in Canada

2024· article· en· W4398773919 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Laila Omar

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Refugee Studies · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicMigration, Health and Trauma
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRefugeePerceptionPsychologyGender studiesSociologyPolitical scienceLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract What role does language learning play in refugees’ memory-construction on the one hand, and imagining of the future self on the other? Using a temporal perspective on migration, I extend scholarship examining the role of language in the space-time continuum of resettlement. With three waves of semi-structured interviews with twenty Syrian refugee mothers (N = 60) who have recently arrived in Canada, this article examines how their experiences with time and future projections are influenced by their experiences of language learning in the host country. First, mothers’ lack of English proficiency and struggle to learn leads to a sense of nostalgia towards the past, where their proficiency in Arabic is associated with past feelings of comfort, security, and mastery. In addition, mothers find themselves ‘stuck’ in the present, where multiple structural barriers (e.g., absence of extended kin; limited government support) and individual challenges (e.g., health issues; having children with disability) significantly slow down their language acquisition process and prevent them from achieving other goals. This leads to a clear conflict between government expectations for the long-term future and the mothers’ immediate priorities. Finally, despite those government temporal expectations building on newcomers’ language acquisition, mothers do not want to envision the future due to past experiences of uncertainty, belief in divine control, and a foreclosure of the future. This article demonstrates the ways in which language, space, and time co-construct notions of the future, and a sense of potential ‘stuckness,’ well beyond the temporal limits of intensive state intervention in refugee lives.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
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 score0.043
Threshold uncertainty score0.309

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0150.009
Scholarly communication0.0060.002
Open science0.0020.004
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.324
Teacher spread0.308 · 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

Citations4
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Refugee StudiesSame topicMigration, Health and TraumaFrench-language works237,207