MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

ATR Harmony in African Languages

2008· article· en· W1992180511 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueLanguage and Linguistics Compass · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicPhonetics and Phonology Research
Canadian institutionsTrinity Western University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsVowel harmonyHarmony (color)LinguisticsAssimilation (phonology)VowelComputer sciencePhilosophyArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract A widespread phonological pattern in African languages of the Niger‐Congo and Nilo‐Saharan families is a type of vowel harmony or assimilation based on a phonological feature [ATR], or advanced tongue root. This article introduces the general behavior of African ATR harmony systems, briefly describes their geographic and genetic distribution, and discusses the phonetic basis of the feature [ATR]. I describe several aspects of typological variation in ATR harmony languages, with particular attention to some controversial issues of theoretical interest on which recent research may shed additional light. Topics covered include the nature of a widely discussed typological distinction between dominant and root‐controlled ATR harmony languages, the extent to which [–ATR] vowels behave as dominant, the behavior of the frequently neutral vowel /a/, and the question of whether the direction of application of ATR harmony can be predicted from the morphological possibilities found in a language.

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.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.520
Threshold uncertainty score0.554

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.036
GPT teacher head0.349
Teacher spread0.313 · 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