MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W6988486563

부랴트어 소멸위기와 민족정체성: 러시아연방 부랴트공화국을 중심으로

2012· other· ko· W6988486563 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueSeoul National University Open Repository (Seoul National University) · 2012
Typeother
Languageko
Field
Topic
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEthnic groupGovernment (linguistics)Russian languageLanguage policyQuarter (Canadian coin)
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

부랴트족은 러시아연방의 동 시베리아 지역에서 가장 큰 소수민족으로 17세기 이후 약 330여 년 간 타민족의 지배를 받아온 민족이다. 부랴트족은 오랫동안 살아오면서 자신들의 언어를 잘 유지했지만 최근 35여 년 사이 급속하게 민족어 사용자가 줄어들면서 민족어의 소멸위기에 처해있다.\n\n1970년 인구조사에 따르면 소련 내 부랴트인의 수 314,671명 중 민족어 사용자 수는 291,432명으로 부랴트어는 활발하게 사용되는 언어였다. 1989년 인구조사 통계는 1970년과 1989년 사이 부랴트족 중 민족어를 구사할 수 없는 사람들의 수가 2배로 증가했다(성종환 2003:28)는 것을 보여준다. 필자가 2004년 7월부터 2005년 7월까지 부랴트 공화국에서 현지조사를 실시 할 당시 만난 대부분이 부랴트인들은 공화국 내 부랴트족 중 약 20~25% 정도만이 부랴트어를 구사할 수 있을 것이라고 일관되게 말했으며 실제로 필자가 부랴트어 소멸위기의 원인을 분석하기 위해 접한 수 백 명의 부랴트인들 중 도시와 지방의 차이가 있으나 대략 20~25% 정도만이 부랴트어를 구사할 수 있었다. 부랴트어를 모국어처럼 구사할 수 없는 약 80%의 부랴트인 중 대부분은 몇개의 단어를 알아듣지만 부랴트어로 의사소통이 불가능하며 이중 소수는 대화의 내용을 조금 파악할 수는 있으나 말은 전혀 할 줄 모르는 수준이었다. 또 부랴트 공화국 내에서 부랴트어를 구사할 줄 아는 사람들의 연령대는 대부분 40대 이상으로 특별한 대책이 없는 한 부랴트어 사용자는 시간의 흐름에 따라 소멸될 가능성이 높다.\n\nThe Buryats are a part of Mongolian ethnic groups subjugated by Russia in the late 17th century. In the process of resistance against the subjugation, they formed the Buryat ethnic consciousness. However, nowadays only about quarter of the Buryats use Buryat language and the number of Buryat language users continuously decreases. Major reasons for that include 1) the Soviet government made Russian language the only official language during the Soviet Union, 2) the school system uses Russian language and allows very few hours for Buryat language, 3) Russians has been the majority (about 70%), the Buryats has been the minority (about 25%), and major social positions are occupied by Russians, 4) those who use Buryat language move to urban areas don't use Buryat language any more in general, 5) the increasing number of Buryat families use Russian at home, 6) no effective efforts on the government and the congress for Buryat language, and 7) the stigma on Buryat language.\n\nThe responses on the decrease of Buryat language usage are different from generation to generation. The young group doesn't have interest in using Buryat language and they think the Buryatness does not depend on Buryat language usage but on blood and face. However, the old generation still consider Buryat language as the major criteria for the Buryatness.\n\nRapid decrease of the users of Buryat language makes it impossible to use Buryat language as the main criteria for Buryat identity. Buryate language is in the process of being deleted from the criteria of Buryat ethnic identity.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies, Scholarly communication, Open science, Research integrity, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Research integrity, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.555
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0030.004
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.002
Bibliometrics0.0090.007
Science and technology studies0.0050.002
Scholarly communication0.0010.007
Open science0.0090.005
Research integrity0.0030.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0160.022

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 head0.028
GPT teacher head0.242
Teacher spread0.214 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSeoul National University Open Repository (Seoul National University)French-language works237,207