Language beliefs, attitudes and practices in contemporary Kyrgyzstan with particular reference to English
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Kyrgyzstan’s language ecology is shaped by its Turkic roots, with Kyrgyz as the state language and Uzbek as a key minority language. Russian, historically dominant, remains the most widespread foreign language and continues to play a central role in the country’s linguistic hierarchy. Since independence in 1991, English is the most widely taught foreign language, often in English-medium instruction (EMI). Increasing English use reflects broader global trends linked to World Englishes and raises questions about evolving language ideologies in the region. This article traces the development of English in Kyrgyzstan, analyzing its position within a linguistically hybrid and hierarchical setting. It presents new research on university language majors, focusing on their language beliefs, attitudes, and practices regarding English in relation to Kyrgyz and Russian. The study highlights emerging patterns of Kyrgyz-Russian-English trilingualism and explores how English functions – whether competitively, subtractively, or complementarily – within this multilingual environment, calling for further research and reflection on language and education policy.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".