MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W908811875 · doi:10.1163/9789401209748_012

‘Thingmy an aa the rest o it’: Vague Language in Spoken Scottish English

2013· book-chapter· en· W908811875 sur OpenAlex

Pourquoi ce travail est dans la base

Une base qui oublie comment elle a trouvé un travail ne peut pas être vérifiée. Voici les voies qui ont admis celui-ci.

aboutLe titre ou le résumé porte un signal canadien du lexique géographique.
no affAucune affiliation canadienne : ce travail est invisible pour une base fondée sur la seule affiliation.
Aucune affiliation canadienne. Une base fondée sur la seule affiliation (le devis habituel) n'aurait jamais vu ce travail. C'est l'un des travaux qui justifient l'inversion de la base.

Notice bibliographique

Revuenon disponible
Typebook-chapter
Langueen
DomaineArts and Humanities
ThématiqueLinguistics, Language Diversity, and Identity
Établissements canadiensnon disponible
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésScotsLinguisticsMeaning (existential)VaguenessPropositionNounProper nounComputer sciencePsychologyPhilosophy

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

This SCOTS corpus study of vague language (VL), or forms that are intentionally imprecise and heavily dependent on shared contextual knowledge for their meaning, suggests that VL is more a Scottish Standard English than Scots phenomenon. The most frequent types are general nouns (people, things), adding to involvement, and epistemic modifiers sort of and kind of, protecting face.Keywords: vague language, SCOTS corpus, Scots, Scottish Standard English, general nouns, epistemic modifiersAll language contains vagueness to a greater or lesser degree.1 The vague language (VL) explored in this chapter is at the less explicit end of the cline: forms that are intentionally fuzzy, general, and imprecise, have low semantic content, and are heavily dependent on shared contextual knowledge for their meaning. In this chapter, an expression is considered vague if it can be contrasted with another more contentive expression which appears to render the same proposition, if it is purposely and unabashedly vague, or if the meaning arises from intrinsic uncertainty.2Since VL is a feature more of spoken language than of written,3 the study described in this chapter examined VL in the spoken part of the Scottish Corpus of Texts & Speech (SCOTS), which was 20% of the total four million words, at the time of writing.4 The study took a broad-brush approach, covering semantically empty nouns (general nouns such as thing, colloquial general nouns such as thingummy, and general nominal clusters such as what-d'ya-call-it), vague modifiers (vague quantifiers as in lots of and vague epistemic modifiers as in sort of), and general extenders (as in or something and and things). It did not limit its focus to one of these parts of speech, as previous studies have done, since it set out to paint a general picture of the main VL forms and how they relate to each other. The aim was to understand the distribution and usage of Scottish Standard English and Scots VL, and to discover the co-textual and socio-functional features of each in the SCOTS corpus.Background - Scottish EnglishDouglas suggests that many Scottish people use both Scottish Standard English (SSE) and Scots, employing SSE in formal interaction and official writing, and Scots in informal contexts and the spoken mode.5 The Scottish Government survey finds that 'Scots is primarily a spoken language rather than one that is read or written'.6 Anderson finds the opposite to be true in the SCOTS corpus: she examined intensifiers and discovered that intensifiers at the SSE end of the continuum (totally, definitely, and utterly) tended to occur in spontaneous spoken interactions, and those at the Scots end (gey and unco) mostly occurred in literary texts. She explains this as:partly due to the make-up of the corpus, in which most of the participants in conversations or interviews use a variety of language somewhere around the middle of the Scots/English continuum rather than Broad Scots. [...] but also partly [...] because of the tendency for 'dense' Scots (language with a high incidence of specifically Scots lexical and grammatical features) to be found in literary writing rather than colloquial (and spoken) language.7Vague language - FormsThere seems to be a universal English VL. Cutting has collated the features of VL that have been discovered in studies of British, Canadian, Hong Kong, Irish, and New Zealand English: they are semantically empty nouns, vague modifiers and general extenders.8 Definitions for these are given below, as the study described in this chapter used these categories. Throughout this chapter, I refer to the examples quoted within each category here as SSE VL, to distinguish them from Scots VL.There are three types of semantically empty noun. The prototypical one is the general noun, or superordinate noun, which is heavily dependent on the context for meaning.9 Thing, place, and person are dummy nouns,10 that can have as much semantic content as pro-forms it or they, and can be an ad hoc category which does not have well-established category representations or a clear boundary. …

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Prédiction distillée sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,000
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesCharge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)
Catégories consensuellesCharge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Sans objet · Signal consensuel: aucune
GenreSignal candidat: Autre · Signal consensuel: Autre
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,656
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,999

Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0000,001
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0000,000
Bibliométrie0,0000,000
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0000,000
Communication savante0,0010,000
Science ouverte0,0010,000
Intégrité de la recherche0,0000,001
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0340,001

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,029
Tête enseignante GPT0,221
Écart entre enseignants0,192 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle