ビジネスコミュニケーションにおけるPlainEnglishの普及状況について
Bibliographic record
Abstract
To attain the successful business performance through communication, creating of an effective messages has always been pursued. In the field of business English,too,it is a crucial theme to coin effective expressions.In the meantime, there have been many arguments over the extent to which business jargon should be allowed to be used in business writing.Generally speaking,it is true that language usage gradually changes as society changes over time.For example, the rapid development in recent years of e-mail and other internet technologies has exerted great influence on the usage of language and the way of communication. As the conventional English expressions including business jargons have been reviewed,there has been a growing movement to improve vocabulary and expressions in business English.This is called the Plain English Campaign which is defusing in the U.K.,Canada,theU.S.A.and other countries.In fact,an enlightenment movement of plain English is spread-ing in the academic and educational world.But a question remains over how plain English is perceived and accepted in the business workplace where English is practically used. The aim of this article is to examine and analyze business people's attitude toward business jargon and
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 | 0.004 | 0.011 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.094 | 0.067 |
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".