Bibliographic record
Abstract
Guided by principles such as those of economy and symmetry, both major schools of modern phonology (structuralist and generativist) have tended to distinguish too sharply between the paradigmatic and syntagmatic functions of phonological features. In addition, both types of phonology have tended to undervalue the functions of features which could be classified as having syntagmatic functions only. In structural phonology such features were regarded as merely allophonic; in generative phonology they were classified as purely redundant. Redundancy, however, performs the essential function of insurance in human speech (Fry 1977: 75-89)-synchronically, it offsets all types of what is called NOISE in communication theory (Cherry 1966); diachronically, it permits orderly changes from one phonological stage to another. Redundancy, in other words, helps us solve what Weinreich et al. (1968) called the transition problem in historical linguistics. Finally, the fact is that phonological features normally have both syntagmatic and paradigmatic functions, and that it is not always obvious which of these two functions is primary and which is secondary.
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 | 0.004 | 0.014 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.013 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.007 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.005 | 0.006 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.021 | 0.003 |
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".