Usos directos e indirectos del presente de indicativo en la segunda mitad del siglo XVI
Bibliographic record
Abstract
En este artículo estudiamos los usos directos e indirectos del presente de indicativo en la segunda mitad del siglo XVI. A partir del concepto de temporalidad verbal, se analizan todos los presentes que hay en el corpus en el cual se realiza la investigación, valorando y calificando en cada caso el uso que se hace de la forma verbal. es un estudio de Pragmática Histórica que intenta aportar una nueva orientación y nuevos datos a la historia de la lengua española, en un terreno de la gramática tan delicado como es el sistema verbal.In this article we study the direct and indirect uses of the present of indicative in the second half of the sixteenth century. based on the concept of tense, we analyze every present that is in the corpus in which the research is conducted, evaluating and qualifying in each case the use made of the verbal form. this article is a study of Historical Pragmatics that attempts to provide a new direction and new data on the history of the spanish language, in an grammar area as sensitive as the verbal system.
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 | 0.003 | 0.009 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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".