MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1993819844 · doi:10.1353/lan.2010.0019

Variations on polysynthesis: The Eskaleut languages. Ed. by Marc-Antoine Mahieu and Nicole Tersis. (Typological studies in language 86.) Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 2009. Pp. ix, 312. ISBN 9789027206671. $165 (Hb).

2010· article· en· W1993819844 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Keren Rice

Bibliographic record

VenueLanguage · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicLinguistics and Cultural Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLinguisticsMorphemeInflectionVerbHistorySociologyPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Reviewed by: Variations on polysynthesis: The Eskaleut languages Keren Rice Variations on polysynthesis: The Eskaleut languages. Ed. by Marc-Antoine Mahieu and Nicole Tersis. (Typological studies in language 86.) Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 2009. Pp. ix, 312. ISBN 9789027206671. $165 (Hb). This book is, to my knowledge, a first in English, bringing together research on aspects of Eskaleut languages (also called Eskimo-Aleut). These languages are or were spoken in the Arctic— Siberia, the Aleutian Islands, Alaska, Canada, and Greenland. They have been the topic of study by a fine group of scholars in recent years, and this book demonstrates the stimulating research that is taking place. Perhaps Eskimo (as opposed to Aleut) languages are best known for their polysynthesis, or, in informal terms, their high number of morphemes per word. De Reuse (1994), following Anthony Woodbury, proposes the picture of the Eskimo verb in 1. [End Page 731] 1. base + postbaseno + ending + encliticsmo The base is the lexical core; postbases are derivational suffixes, and the endings mark inflection. The structure in 1 alone does not immediately persuade the reader that these languages are polysynthetic. As the authors note, their polysynthetic nature becomes evident through multiple occurrences of postbases and enclitics. Some examples that illustrate the complexity of the word are given in 2.1 2. a. Central Siberian Yupik (de Reuse 1994:25) angyaghllangyugtuqlu angyagh-ghllag-nge-yug-tuq=llu boat-big.N-acquire.N-want.to.V-ind(3sg)=also ‘also, he wants to acquire a big boat’ b. Central Alaskan Yupik (Ch. 6, p. 83) qaya-pi-li-sciigal-ngu-u-lria kayak-genuine-make-cannot-denom-be-rel.abs.sg. ‘the kind/type of one who cannot make a genuine canoe (the one who is onewho cannot make a genuine canoe)’ These words are ‘long’ in containing many morphemes. Mithun 1999 argues that they are words according to criteria that include native-speaker judgments and phonological characteristics. Eskimo languages thus are traditionally considered excellent exemplars of polysynthesis, and the title Variations on polysynthesis is apt for a book on languages of this group. While the title might suggest that the papers all concern polysynthesis, the book is quite varied in its coverage. As the editors say in the introduction, its primary goal is ‘to situate the Eskaleut languages typologically in general linguistic terms, particularly with regard to polysynthesis’ (vii). The papers range from those that deal directly with polysynthesis to those that examine syntactic and semantic properties of the languages, to those that focus on discourse structure, and, finally, to those that examine language contact and change. The chapters in this volume present studies that center on the issue of what it means to be polysynthetic: they discuss synchrony and diachrony, including ongoing change; they ask whether inflection and derivation present sufficient categories to account for the rich morphology of Eskaleut and other languages; they question whether the verb is a word from a morphological perspective or is perhaps a word simply from a phonological perspective. Furthermore, the contributors raise questions of importance to linguistic theory, highlighting different theoretical perspectives, united by the languages of study. Many of the papers take up comparative discussion, within the family and beyond, in which languages as diverse as Chukchi, Mohawk, Apache, and Nu-Cha-Nuulth figure prominently. The editors sum up the volume by noting that it ‘shows how polysynthesis increases or decreases according to factors of internal development … or under the pressure of innovation resulting from bilingualism, language contact, or new forms of expression in the younger generation’ (viii). In the following discussion, I concentrate on the contributions to polysynthesis, with brief summaries of other topics. As befitting a book with the word ‘polysynthesis’ in the title, Part 1 begins with articles that directly address the topic of polysynthesis—a topic of theoretical concern in recent years. In the Eskaleut tradition, polysynthesis is defined as above: languages with a high number of morphemes per word. Baker 1996, an influential work on polysynthesis, provides a narrower definition, one that excludes Eskaleut languages, since they lack structures that Baker views as critical for polysynthesis. In particular, Baker argues that polysynthetic languages use pronominal affixes and incorporated...

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.039
Threshold uncertainty score0.131

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.005
Science and technology studies0.0020.002
Scholarly communication0.0040.009
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0390.018

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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.273
Teacher spread0.252 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations0
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueLanguageSame topicLinguistics and Cultural StudiesFrench-language works237,207