Le vocabulaire des directions cardinales dans les dialectes du continuum cri-innu-naskapi-atikamekw
Bibliographic record
Abstract
L’objectif de cet article est de présenter une étymologie comparée du vocabulaire des directions cardinales dans les langues et dialectes appartenant à la branche géographique de l’algonquien du Centre et, plus particulièrement, dans les dialectes appartenant au continuum cri-innu-naskapi-atikamekw. L’analyse de la morphologie et de la sémantique des mots (particules, verbes et substantifs) qui servent à exprimer les directions cardinales montre que ces langues font usage de quatre sources de lexicalisation pour nommer les directions cardinales (cycle du soleil, direction du vent, cours des rivières et déité éolienne/cardinale). Les données des dialectes plus orientaux du continuum cri-innu-naskapi-atikamekw indiquent que, dans les sociétés traditionnelles, le référent qui sert de source de lexicalisation des termes de directions (cours des rivières et cycle du soleil) est souvent plus saillant que la direction elle-même, et que certains changements économiques, sociaux, culturels ou religieux, provoqués par la présence des personnes et des institutions de la société industrielle dominante, peuvent accélérer le chevauchement, puis le remplacement des termes dans le champ lexical des directions cardinales.
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".