MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2112726262 · doi:10.7202/602737ar

Aspects synchroniques et diachroniques du tu interrogatif en québécois

2009· article· fr· W2112726262 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Marc Picard

Bibliographic record

VenueRevue québécoise de linguistique · 2009
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicLinguistics and Discourse Analysis
Canadian institutionsConcordia University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesPhilosophyArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Les clitiques et les affixes, comme on l’a souvent observé, proviennent d’anciens morphèmes lexicaux. En français, une particule interrogative s’est développée d’une façon tout à fait inusitée, c’est-à-dire à partir de la fusion de la consonne finale d’un verbe avec le pronom de la troisième personne du singulier, et cet élément s’est propagé graduellement aux autres personnes sous l’effet de divers processus phonologiques, syntaxiques et analogiques. Bien que ce ti soit devenu obsolète en français hexagonal, son substitut tu est toujours très vivant en français canadien, la construction sujet + verbe + tu s’avérant la façon la plus usuelle de formuler des interrogations fermées dans ce dialecte. En dépit de tout ce qu’on sait sur l’histoire de ce morphème, cependant, on n’en est pas encore arrivé à en déterminer le statut grammatical précis. Or les critères que l’on a proposés depuis quelques années pour distinguer entre les clitiques et les affixes semblent indiquer que ce morphème est effectivement un suffixe.

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 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)0.003
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.909
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.284
Teacher spread0.271 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations14
Published2009
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRevue québécoise de linguistiqueSame topicLinguistics and Discourse AnalysisFrench-language works237,207