MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2067443652 · doi:10.1075/cf.3.2.03dan

Modification and constructional blends in the use of proper names

2011· article· en· W2067443652 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.

Bibliographic record

VenueConstructions and Frames · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicNatural Language Processing Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPrinciple of compositionalityMetonymyProper nounNounLinguisticsContext (archaeology)Meaning (existential)Frame (networking)Computer scienceRange (aeronautics)Natural language processingHistoryPhilosophyEpistemologyEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper discusses a range of attested examples of NPs in which proper names are preceded by articles, determiners, and adjectives, arguing that such instances do not constitute a change into a common noun category. On the basis of such examples, it is claimed that the meaning of proper names relies not on unique reference, but on frame metonymy. Frames evoked by proper names interact with NP constructions, yielding a range of uses driven by the discourse context. Further, it is shown how the use of modified proper names in copular constructions is best explained through the framework of blending and the concept of constructional compositionality (as defined in Dancygier and Sweetser 2005).

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: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.252
Threshold uncertainty score0.150

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)0.0000.000

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 head0.063
GPT teacher head0.259
Teacher spread0.196 · 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