Valeur sémantique et comportement syntaxique de l’infinitif substitut dans quelques corpus oraux
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Dans cet article, nous nous proposons d’analyser les fonctions multiples de l’infinitif substitut dans huit corpus du français parlé. Ce phénomène grammatical semble particulièrement répandu dans les parlers français hors de France et sert avant tout à remplacer un temps du récit (présent, imparfait, passé composé). Outre cette valeur temporelle, l’infinitif substitut peut revêtir une valeur finale ou bien apparaître dans des constructions hypothétiques, ce qui semble être le cas surtout en français québécois. Malgré la relative indépendance syntaxique de cette construction, le lien sémantique avec la proposition qui précède l’infinitif substitut reste fort. L’infinitif substitut peut ainsi être interprété comme un phénomène de l’oral qui souligne la tendance à l’invariabilité et à la réduction des paradigmes verbaux.
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 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 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".