Language and identity : a quantitative study of American Sign Language grammatical competency and deaf identity through on-line technology
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Although a clear sense of personal and cultural minority identity makes life easier for any individual, for Deaf people having a cultural identity is critical.'When Deaf people are together, they each contribute to group formation, maintenance, and social ties within the Deaf community through the use of signed language as a pivotal tool, yet each Deaf person has his or her own individual personality and language variety.Deaf My second language is French.Within the Quebec hearing culture, I learned the importance of the French Quebec culture during the troubling moment in Canadian history with the referendums for the independence of Quebec.This also brought the French linguistics laws in the 1970's and 1980's.I experienced the social revolution and political activism of both my world and their world, and often they collided: the Deaf Quebec community and the hearing Quebec community.I experienced these struggles and changes within my heart and saw them with my own eyes, which has lead me to be a better observer of the social and cultural dynamic of linguistic minority groups, such as the French in English Canada and the Deaf in spoken language society.My parents are proud Deaf people and also proud to be Quebecers, but they knew the utmost importance of expanding my knowledge of other languages and cultures.'When I was 14 years old, my parents decided to send me to a Deaf summer camp at Camp Mark Seven in New York.I was immersed in American Sign Language (ASL) and Deaf American culture for three weeks.It was a revelation for me to see the similarities and differences between LSQ and ASL.This experience also helped me to see the similarities and differences between the Anglo-Canadian and American cultures.The more I started to interact with different languages and cultures, the more I was able to see the diversity within the language use in the Deaf community.While developing my first and subsequent languages (LSQ, ASL, French and English), and acquiringdifferent cultural behaviors (Deaf and hearing), I also gained a greater appreciation of the complex interaction between language and culture.
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 | 0.007 | 0.014 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".