MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1876216503 · doi:10.1017/s0008413100000529

Stress properties of Greek compounds: Psycholinguistic considerations

2015· article· en· W1876216503 on OpenAlexaff
Athanasios Tsiamas, Gonia Jarema, Eva Kehayia, Gevorg Chilingaryan

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Canadian Journal of Linguistics / La revue canadienne de linguistique · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicLanguage, Metaphor, and Cognition
Canadian institutionsMcGill UniversityCentre for Interdisciplinary Research in RehabilitationUniversité de MontréalJewish Rehabilitation HospitalInstitut Universitaire de Gériatrie de Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsStress (linguistics)PsychologyLinguisticsCognitionPsycholinguisticsRelation (database)Cognitive psychologyComputer sciencePhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Theoretical accounts of Greek compounds argue for a close relation between their stress properties and their underlying structure. Compounds that preserve and receive stress at the same position as their second constituent are analyzed as stem-word constructions, while those that receive antepenultimate stress are viewed as belonging to the stem-stem category. Using an auditory lexical decision task, we examine the effect of stress change on the processing of compounds in the light of existing theoretical linguistic accounts. Although our experimental results do not reach statistical significance, we believe that they are informative of the cognitive status and role of stress in compound processing. Finally, they relate to existing theories of compounding in Greek and reflect the complex interaction of the psycholinguistic effects of stress and the structural properties of these constructions.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.037
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.569
Threshold uncertainty score0.971

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.037
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.051
GPT teacher head0.287
Teacher spread0.236 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations2
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Canadian Journal of Linguistics / La revue canadienne de linguistiqueSame topicLanguage, Metaphor, and CognitionFrench-language works237,207