Normes linguistiques à l’épreuve du numérique : une étude comparative des discours en ligne
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Interactive internet platforms allow speakers to comment on linguistic variation in utterances from around the world to which they are exposed. Digital platforms thus function not only as spaces for discussing linguistic usage but also as arenas for negotiating language norms. Participants in these discussions often adopt strongly asserted normative positions. In this context, a project developed at the University of Kiel is presented in the article. It aims to analyse such normative discourses from a comparative perspective, with the goal of highlighting the specificities of different linguistic cultures. The article draws attention to a gradual shift in the conception of linguistic norms: traditional regulatory institutions increasingly see their authority challenged by a significant portion of language users, who formulate normative claims grounded in social arguments. This shift reflects a normativisation process that is now shaped by more participatory and transnational dynamics.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it