MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2038403419 · doi:10.7202/603105ar

Berber Clitic Doubling and Syntactic Extraction

2009· article· en· W2038403419 on OpenAlexafffundvenue
Mohamed Guerssel

Bibliographic record

VenueRevue québécoise de linguistique · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicLanguage, Linguistics, Cultural Analysis
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec à Montréal
FundersSocial Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada
KeywordsCliticRealization (probability)LinguisticsContrast (vision)Characterization (materials science)Computer scienceNatural language processingMathematicsArtificial intelligencePhysicsPhilosophyStatistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The aim of this paper is twofold. First it is argued that the overt realization of lexical subjects in Berber is an instance of clitic doubling. The markers that have traditionally been considered to be merely agreement markers are to be treated as clitics. Second, and contrary to standard assumptions, it is shown that extraction out of clitic doubling is universally possible provided a default clitic is available. Evidence in favor of the view that syntactic extraction out of doubling is rooted in a proper characterization of agreement comes from a comparison of the Berber dialects that exhibit clitic doubling and those that do not. The two dialect types contrast exactly as expected within the approach advocated.

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)0.003
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.021

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0030.003
Scholarly communication0.0030.006
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.001

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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.274
Teacher spread0.255 · 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
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

Citations12
Published2009
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRevue québécoise de linguistiqueSame topicLanguage, Linguistics, Cultural AnalysisFrench-language works237,207