MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4407757006 · doi:10.1098/rsos.241091

Projected speaker numbers and dormancy risks of Canada’s Indigenous languages

2025· article· en· W4407757006 on OpenAlexaffabout
Michaël Boissonneault, Adam J. R. Tallman, Volker Gast, Simon J. Greenhill

Bibliographic record

VenueRoyal Society Open Science · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicLanguage and cultural evolution
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Montréal
FundersDeutsche ForschungsgemeinschaftWenner-Gren Foundation
KeywordsIndigenousCensusPopulationDiversity (politics)VitalityLinguistic diversityLinguisticsGeographyHistoryDemographyPolitical scienceSociologyBiologyLawEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

UNESCO launched the International Decade of Indigenous Languages in 2022 to draw attention to the impending loss of nearly half of the world's linguistic diversity. However, how the speaker numbers and dormancy risks of these languages will evolve remains largely unexplored. Here, we use Canadian census data and probabilistic population projection to estimate changes in speaker numbers and dormancy risks of 27 Indigenous languages. Our model suggests that speaker numbers could, over the period 2001-2101, decline by more than 90% in 16 languages and that dormancy risks could surpass 50% among five. Since the declines are greater among already less commonly spoken languages, just nine languages could account for more than 99% of all Canadian Indigenous language speakers in 2101. Finally, dormancy risks tend to be higher among isolates and within specific language families, providing additional evidence about the uneven nature of language endangerment worldwide. Our approach further illustrates the magnitude of the crisis in linguistic diversity and suggests that demographic projection could be a useful tool in assessing the vitality of the world's languages.

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 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: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.461
Threshold uncertainty score0.914

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.351
Teacher spread0.332 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRoyal Society Open ScienceSame topicLanguage and cultural evolutionFrench-language works237,207