Language shifting among the Hodenosaunee of Southern Ontario : Edwaenagé: tsgó -- Shogwaya> dihs> oh nidwawenó :de: shogwá:wi: tsáhohwejáda:t
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Through aggressive legislative and educational policies Indigenous languages \nglobally have been shifted to the language of the dominant society. Globalization has \nbrought previously geo-politically and/or geo-linguistically isolated people and language \n. groups into close proximity that necessitated interaction and at times intense power \nstruggles. There are currently approximately 6,000 spoken languages in the world, more \nthan half are either endangered, dying or disappearing altogether. Canadian statistics \nreveal an overall 3 % decline in the intergenerational transmission of language. Of the \noriginal 60 Indigenous languages spoken in Canada, 8 are extinct, 13 are nearly extinct, \nand 23 are critical. The remaining languages have a slim chance of survival. Within the \nnext 100 years only 4 Indigenous languages will remain. The Hodenosaunee languages \nof Southern Ontario are not incl~ded among the list of languages that will survive the \nnext 100 years. There are, without a doubt, complex challenges in the maintenance of \nIndigenous languages within a dominant-culture influenced environment. Given the \nincreasing awareness of the social impact of linguistic integrity and preservation of \nlanguages on Indigenous people as a whole, this study considers how language is \ncurrently being used; the social, economic, and political implications of language \nshifting; the need to shift our social consciousness in order to understand the urgency in \nprivileging our Hodenosaunee languages; as well as ways in which we might achieve \nthose goals as individuals, as families, and as a community.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.015 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.013 | 0.001 |
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".