MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2118549823 · doi:10.1353/cjl.2007.0014

That Crazy Idea of Hers: The English Double Genitive as Focus Construction

2006· article· en· W2118549823 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

VenueThe Canadian Journal of Linguistics / La revue canadienne de linguistique · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicSyntax, Semantics, Linguistic Variation
Canadian institutionsMount Royal UniversityRoyal College of Physicians and Surgeons of CanadaUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGenitive caseDemonstrativeLinguisticsFocus (optics)Relative clauseFunction (biology)SociologyPsychologyPhilosophyNoun

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Previously, no single analysis has accounted for all three subtypes of the English double genitive construction: the indefinite (a book of John’s), the definite (the book of John’s that you read), and the demonstrative (that book of John’s). Phonetic and pragmatic evidence discussed in the literature—for example, stress and familiarity/importance to the discourse participants—indicates that the demonstrative construction is a focus construction, bringing the possessed item into a prominent position in the discourse. The application of the Focus Hypothesis to all double genitives is empirically supported and is consistent with theoretical considerations having to do with the function of relative clauses and distributional differences between double genitives and standard partitives.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.019
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
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 score0.468
Threshold uncertainty score0.989

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.019
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.216
Teacher spread0.200 · 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