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 OpenAlex
Keren Rice

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.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

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.

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 categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.243
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

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 studies0.0010.001
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 head0.021
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