MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4416864840 · doi:10.1075/aplv.25003.umb

Stability in the face of contact

2025· article· en· W4416864840 on OpenAlexaffabout
Pocholo Umbal

Bibliographic record

VenueAsia-Pacific Language Variation · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicLinguistic Variation and Morphology
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTagalogCoarticulationVowelContext (archaeology)Language contactFace (sociological concept)MultilingualismHeritage language

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The sociolinguistic realities of multilingualism raise questions about the linguistic outcomes of language contact. The present study addresses this issue in the context of heritage languages. It investigates whether the relative backness of /u/ in Heritage Tagalog exhibits crosslinguistic influence from English. Over 1600 tokens of Tagalog /u/ were extracted from spontaneous speech of two generations of heritage speakers in Toronto and two groups of age-matched homeland speakers in Manila. A multivariate analysis of linguistic and social factors shows lack of an apparent time change in Toronto and in Manila: /u/ is realized in the back periphery of the vowel space; though some degree of fronting in both varieties is evident, this is attributable to coarticulation and speech rate. The study demonstrates that Tagalog /u/ in Toronto shares the same variable system as in Manila, and properties of the linguistic system can remain stable in the face of contact.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.019
Threshold uncertainty score0.038

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.312
Teacher spread0.295 · 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 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 venueAsia-Pacific Language VariationSame topicLinguistic Variation and MorphologyFrench-language works237,207