MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2013539348 · doi:10.1017/s0959269502000145

The complementizer C with the WH-word <i>quo</i> in a Franco-Ontarian vernacular of south-western Ontario

2002· article· en· W2013539348 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.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of French Language Studies · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicLinguistics and Discourse Analysis
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Windsor
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComplementizerVernacularStatus quoLinguisticsPhraseHistorySarcasmFeature (linguistics)SociologyPolitical scienceSyntaxPhilosophyLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this article, we will examine the Complementizer Phrase (CP) involving the element quo in the oral expression of a small French community in the south-western tip of the province of Ontario in Canada, in an area historically known as La Petite-Côte (LPC) where French has been spoken for three centuries now. We will examine the various types of sentences in LPC that feature a CP: free relatives, partial direct questions, indirect questions and full relatives. The Complementizer in LPC can be simple or composite; it is more complex than its standard French (SF) counterpart. We will examine the various allomorphs of each one of these Complementizers. Contrary to Standard French, LPC French, like colloquial French and other French Canadian vernaculars, allows doubly filled CP. The aim of this article is to contribute to the descriptive information available about French Canadian varieties.

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: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.714
Threshold uncertainty score0.991

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 head0.041
GPT teacher head0.262
Teacher spread0.221 · 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