Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract In the standard account (Canale 1978, van Kemenade 1987, Lightfoot 1991), there is a sharp divide in word order between Old and Middle English. Old English is INFL-final and OV while Middle English is INFL-medial and VO. Indeed, Lightfoot gives an account of the transition from Old to Middle English based on a catastrophic reanalysis in the twelfth century (Lightfoot 1991, 1999) and, viewed from a certain distance, this story has considerable plausibility. Thus, up until the entry for II22 CE, the syntax of the Peterborough version of the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle, the manuscript which extends furthest into the twelfth century, is that of standard literary Old English. The brief continuations, which end in II54, are hard to interpret but are not revolutionary in their syntax. These are the last documents of Old English. Then in the first quarter of the next century, several prose texts of West Midlands provenance appear, the Ancrene Riwle and the Katherine Group of saints’ lives, whose word order is considerably more modem. INFL-final word order seems absent and surface OV word order be comes a minority pattern. Nevertheless, there is reason to doubt the standard account.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 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".