Linguistic and Ontological Issues at the Heart of the Nunavik Itinerant Court: The Role of Interpreters as Cultural Mediators
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this International Decade of Indigenous Languages (2022–2032)—as proclaimed by the United Nations General Assembly—it is important to note that the Inuit of Nunavik (Arctic Quebec) still widely speak their own language, Inuktitut, while understanding the two colonial languages, English and French, to greatly varying degrees. The Court of Québec has jurisdiction in the region over criminal matters, whereas different legal texts protect the right of Inuit to court interpretation, including the provincial and federal Charters of Rights and Freedoms. In this paper, we address the linguistic challenges of interpreting at the Nunavik Itinerant Court, with the aim of shedding light on the ontological conflicts at the heart of the justice system. We also examine the meaning of “justice” for Inuit. To that end, we use the results of research by the Sentinel North Research Chair on Relations with Inuit Societies (Université Laval).
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.020 | 0.022 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.036 | 0.098 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.022 | 0.014 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.013 |
| Research integrity | 0.005 | 0.009 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".