MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2070809183 · doi:10.1075/sl.33.2.03lef

The contribution of relexification, grammaticalisation, and reanalysis to creole genesis and development

2009· article· en· W2070809183 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

VenueStudies in Language · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicMultilingual Education and Policy
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec à Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCreole languageGrammaticalizationLinguisticsHistoryPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The theory of creole genesis developed in Lefebvre (1998 and related work) is formulated within the framework of the processes otherwise known to play a role in language genesis and language change in general, that is, relexification, grammaticalisation and reanalysis. This paper evaluates the respective contribution of these processes to creole genesis and development. The following issues are taken up. Can functional categories undergo relexification? Is the process at work in creole genesis best characterised as relexification or as transfer? Can there be cases of partial relexification? Are grammaticalisation and reanalysis distinct processes? Is keeping them separate useful in studying creole genesis and development? How are these three processes articulated with respect to each other in creole genesis and development?

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.325
Threshold uncertainty score0.251

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
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 head0.074
GPT teacher head0.492
Teacher spread0.417 · 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