MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2128287973 · doi:10.1017/s0952675701004018

Patterns and timing of glottalisation

2001· article· en· W2128287973 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

VenuePhonology · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicPhonetics and Phonology Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsArticulatorPhonologySyllableLinguisticsPhoneticsOptimality theoryPerceptionPhonological ruleComputer scienceDistribution (mathematics)PsychologySpeech recognitionMathematicsPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Through an investigation of glottalisation in several languages of North America, this article examines the role of perception in the grammatical distribution of segments. Specifically, we consider the hypothesis that perceptual factors on the timing of glottalisation in consonants determine the arrangement of such consonants phonologically. Our conclusion is in the negative. In the cases we study, the distribution of glottalisation appears to be governed by syllable structure, not by glottal timing. We interpret the patterns presented as evidence for a modular theory of phonetics and phonology rather than a theory where properties of articulator timing are directly referenced by phonological constraints. Patterns of glottalisation result from the interaction of phonological submodules that are largely independent of each other, though properties of particular modules may be influenced by phonetic factors.

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 categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.125
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

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)0.0020.000

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 head0.076
GPT teacher head0.372
Teacher spread0.296 · 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