Journal of Religion and Popular Culture Volume 21: Special Edition – Religion and Popular Culture in Canada (2009) Culture in Motion: Yiddish in Canadian Jewish Life
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Le vingtième siècle a vu la transformation du Yiddish au Canada: la langue s'est déplacée d’un vernaculaire immigrant, à une langue de haute culture, à une langue d'héritage et à une composante de la culture populaire juive. Cette transformation correspond à un changement de sa vie institutionnelle, notamment de la publication, la littérature, l'éducation et le théâtre et la musique. L'immigration de masse de dizaines de milliers de juifs Yiddishophones Europe de l’est au début du vingtième siècle a rendu la langue une force significative dans les centres juifs au Canada. Depuis l'Holocauste, le Canada Yiddish a montré la vitalité face à l'usure globale, tant dans la culture Yiddish séculaire modern que dans les communautés Haredi (Ultra Orthodoxes). Ses mécanismes primaires pour la transmission sont centrés sur la performance aussi bien que la traduction. The past century has transformed Yiddish in Canada: it has moved from an immigrant vernacular, to a language of high culture, to a heritage language and component of Jewish popular culture. These changes are reflected in shifts in its institutional life, notably in publishing, literature, education, and theatre and music. The mass immigration of tens of thousands of Yiddish-speaking Eastern European Jews during the early twentieth century rendered the language a significant force in Jewish centres across Canada. In the decades since the Holocaust, Yiddish Canada has shown vitality in the face of global attrition, both in modern secular Yiddish culture and in Haredi (Ultra Orthodox) communities. Its primary mechanisms for transmission are centred on performance as well as translation.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.008 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.010 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.009 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.035 | 0.003 |
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".