MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4400138392 · doi:10.5539/ass.v20n4p12

Emergency Language Services in the China-Myanmar Borderland: A Case of Multilingual Translation Center at Mengding

2024· article· en· W4400138392 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Zheng Tang, Hongmei Yang, Dongqi Yang

Bibliographic record

VenueAsian Social Science · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicInterpreting and Communication in Healthcare
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsChinaEthnic groupLanguage barrierPandemicPolitical sciencePublic healthMultilingualismEconomic growthCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)MedicineSociologyNursingEconomicsLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Emergency language services (ELS) have gained increasing importance in China. Given the shifting multilingual profile in Yunnan, it is of great significance to investigate how language facilitates the access of linguistic minorities to public health information and other key messages in times of crisis. Based on the fieldwork conducted in January 2024 in Mengding, this study examines how a Translation and Interpreting Association (TIA) offers ELS in China’s border town. The findings indicate that both foreign languages and cross-border ethnic groups’ languages are frequently needed for crisis translation and interpreting. In particular, Myanmar is the most frequently needed foreign language, followed by Thai and English, and two cross-border ethnic groups’ languages (Tai and Kokang) are also needed for crisis communication. The findings also reveal that TIA acts as a language broker for offering non-standard Myanmar translation and interpreting services for various crisis events including the COVID-19 pandemic, mitigating border conflicts, and participating in different types of public health emergencies. Based on the findings, it is suggested that effective emergency translation and interpreting services at China’s border towns should take into consideration the multilingual profiles of border migrants of diverse backgrounds. This study can shed lights on emergency language policy and planning in China’s border provinces.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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 score0.032
Threshold uncertainty score0.064

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0130.003
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.000

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 head0.041
GPT teacher head0.471
Teacher spread0.430 · 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

Citations1
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAsian Social ScienceSame topicInterpreting and Communication in HealthcareFrench-language works237,207