FONOLOGÍA DE LA ENTONACIÓN. ASOCIACIÓN PRIMARIA Y SECUNDARIA EN DIALECTOS ANTÍPODAS: ESPAÑOL DE BUENOS AIRES Y DE ESPAÑA
Bibliographic record
Abstract
En el presente trabajo se analiza la influencia de la frase entonativa intermedia (ip), la inflexión ascendente y el acento de frase (H-) en la formalización del acento tonal final de esa ip. El análisis se basa en la Fonología métrica y autosegmental (AM). Los acentos tonales finales se realizan en palabras paroxítonas, proparoxítonas y oxítonas. El corpus de laboratorio está integrado por producciones de hablantes peninsulares (Barcelona y Alicante) y de hablantes argentinos (Buenos Aires). Los acentos tonales finales de ip dentro de ítems paroxítonos y proparoxítonos presentan una estructura formal L*+H, con posrealización del pico tonal en la sílaba postónica. Opuestamente, los acentos tonales finales de ip dentro de palabras oxítonas muestran una estructura formal L+H*, con la realización del pico tonal en la sílaba acentuada. Los resultados sugieren una asociación fonológica secundaria entre el tono y el acento de frase (H-).
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 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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".