Investigating attitudes towards a changing use of anglicisms in Quebec French
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract This article investigates speakers’ attitudes towards the use of anglicisms in Quebec French, particularly verbs. The common practice in Quebec French is to morphologically integrate these anglicisms into the French language (e.g., il m'a ghosté ). However, in recent years, some French-speaking Quebecers have been using the unintegrated forms (e.g., il m'a ghost ). This change of practice for the use of English-origin verbs is a linguistic innovation that is emerging from young French speakers in the Montreal area (M-E Bouchard 2023a). To investigate attitudes towards the use of anglicisms (integrated and non-integrated forms), 675 French-speaking Quebecers were asked the following open-ended question: Do you have anything to say about the use of anglicisms in Quebec French? The current study consists of a qualitative analysis of the participants’ answers to this specific question. This study has found evidence of linguistic hierarchies between the use of anglicisms that are morphologically integrated and those that are not. The anglicisms that are not morphologically integrated into the French language are perceived by many participants as incorrect and as challenging communication and understanding between users and non-users of the unintegrated forms. Participants associate the use of the unintegrated forms with young people.
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 | 0.002 | 0.112 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".