Jezične politike u državama u kojima je engleski jezik dominantan: Slučaj španjolskog i francuskog jezika
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The main focus of this paper is the analysis of language policies in the following Englishdominant countries: the USA, Canada, the United Kingdom, Australia and New Zealand, with the emphasis on two major European languages: Spanish and French. The first part of this paper consists of a brief presentation of the definitions of language policy and language planning as well as their types. In the following parts the reader is provided with some important facts about the researched countries and their languages, followed by the development of their language policies. Furthermore, the statuses of Spanish and French and the degree of their importance in the education and government of mentioned countries throughout the history and at present day are described. Spanish and French have a significant role in the countries analysed in this thesis. Spanish is especially acknowledged in the United States due to a large number of its speakers, while French in Canada shares the official status with English. In the UK, Australia and New Zealand these two major European languages are known to be attractive in the context of foreign language studies.
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 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 teacher head, 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".