Subject/object asymmetries in the grammar of bilingual and monolingual Spanish speakers
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper argues against connectionist models of language acquisition. It examines knowledge of the properties of subjects and objects in Spanish, particularly in impersonal passives and inchoatives. In both of these structures, the reflexive clitic se is obligatorily present and the linear order of elements is the same, namely [se V NP], with agreement between the verb and the noun phrase. In other words, the input is identical in both cases (se quemaron los libros ‘the books burned/were burned’ is ambiguous between both structures). However, the NP in the impersonal passive exhibits some of the properties of objects while the NP in the inchoatives behaves exclusively like a subject. An empirical study shows that three groups of speakers of Spanish, a monolingual Spanish group, an early English/Spanish bilingual group and a group of late learners of Spanish, are aware of these differences. As the input is ambiguous, it is argued that a model such as that provided by connectionist theories, which argues that the input is sufficient for acquisition, cannot account for the data.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
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.
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".