MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2033969131 · doi:10.1163/15699846-01402002

Exceptional Clitic Placement in Cypriot Greek: Results from an MET Study

2014· article· en· W2033969131 on OpenAlexaff
Panayiotis A. Pappas

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Greek Linguistics · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicLanguage, Discourse, Communication Strategies
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCliticComplementizerLinguisticsPronounCounterexamplePsychologySet (abstract data type)InterlanguageMathematicsComputer scienceSyntaxPhilosophyCombinatorics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Recent studies on the pattern of clitic placement in Cypriot Greek (Revithiadou 2006; Chatzikyriakidis 2010, 2012; Pappas 2010, 2011), have posited the existence of counterexamples to the rule that the pronoun is proclitic after a complementizer or other such function words. These counterexamples are associated with a specific set of lexical items: έντζε, ότι, επειδή, αφού, and γιατί. Equally unclear is the clitic pattern with pre-verbal elements such as focused DP subjects. I present here the results of an acceptability judgment study of 34 Cypriot speakers based on magnitude estimation tests (MET) in ten different syntactic environments and two different conditions (enclisis vs. proclisis), for a total number of data points N = 680. The results demonstrate that these exceptional patterns are integral parts of Cypriot Greek competence and highlight the role that lexical items can play in terms of creating sub-patterns of generalizations within larger schemes.

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)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.076
GPT teacher head0.341
Teacher spread0.266 · 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 designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations15
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Greek LinguisticsSame topicLanguage, Discourse, Communication StrategiesFrench-language works237,207