“Es kommt nur naturally”: Language use of sixth grade students in an English-German bilingual program
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This thesis discusses language use by sixth grade students in the English-German bilingual program in Winnipeg, Manitoba. This bilingual program started out as a heritage language program in the early 1980s, and continues to be well attended. This project looked at the way in which students used both English and German with a fluently bilingual interviewer in an out-of-classroom setting. The study started with the following research questions: \n1. How do children currently being educated in the English-German bilingual program in Winnipeg, Manitoba use German (the second language or L2) and English in out-of-classroom contexts? \n2. What kind of borrowing tendencies do sixth grade students share? \n3. What do these tendencies tell us about children’s bilingual language use and their communication strategies? \nIt is often assumed that use of L1 when speaking L2 is a sign of laziness or a sign of low language proficiency. However, based on a thorough linguistic analysis of two interviews as case studies, it became clear that borrowing is used for far more diverse purposes than the simple filling of lexical gaps. After an examination that included cultural vs. core borrowing, structural transference, and discourse-related borrowing, the data suggests that depending on the proficiency of the speaker, borrowing is an extremely important communication tool that not only allows the speaker to become more proficient in their L2, but also a more highly developed bilingual.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".