French and English languages in contact: The Chiac case
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study concerns the language variation and changes across Borders in a bilingual context: the Acadian French in contact with North American English. In particular, it explores a specific linguistic idiom called Chiac, a language variety of south-eastern New Brunswick (Canada), characterized by strong English influence on the Acadian French substrate. Originally, it was spoken by bilingual teenagers in Moncton, Canada, and it is based on Canadian French but it contains several English influences both in words/morphemes and semantics/pragmatics. Through structural and lexical analysis, the study aims at underlining the social factors that influence speakers’ choices and particularly those who use Chiac as a communication language. In fact, it is recently spoken by a growing number of speakers not only by teenagers. Variation and change across borders will represent a specific Weltanschauung in a bilingual context where Canadian French is less and less important though it is protected by French speakers as an identity status. Finally, some examples of lexical/phonological/phonetic/syntactic variations will be presented in order to remark strong English influence on this Acadian French substrate in a sociolinguistic perspective.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.011 | 0.005 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 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".