MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2295272948 · doi:10.5539/ijel.v6n1p187

Universal Properties of Human Language in the Light of Natural Phenomena

2016· article· en· W2295272948 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.

venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of English Linguistics · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicLinguistics and Cultural Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLinguistic universalUniversal grammarLinguisticsProblem of universalsGenerative grammarNatural languageGrammarNatural (archaeology)Variety (cybernetics)Human languageRelation (database)Linguistic relativityComputer sciencePsychologyArtificial intelligenceCognitionPhilosophyHistory

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

<p>The investigations of linguistic literature show that linguists today are much inspired by the goals of generative grammar, as well as the important human universals which explain child language acquisition, the universals of general cognition and learning. To put it the other way, linguists are interested in studying the human language to discover the nature of Universal Grammar the principles of which characterize all human languages and this major aim becomes the basis of contemporary linguistic theory of today. As D. Crystal writes: “… the main task of the linguistic scholar is basically to study and understand the general principles upon which all languages are built” (Crystal, 1977).</p><p>In this respect we are sure that this article may throw some light on the origin of universal properties of human language.</p><p>Our aim, accordingly, is to study the origin of general principles of human language and to discover natural factors which cause the human language to have universal properties. In other words, our aim is “to find out the laws of human language” in relation to natural phenomena. In this connection an attempt is made to describe variety of observable similar facts and compare them both pertaining to human language and natural processes.</p>

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)0.009
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.923
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.009
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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.243
Teacher spread0.220 · 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