MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2324641045 · doi:10.1515/jsall-2016-0001

The language of early Buddhism

2016· article· en· W2324641045 on OpenAlexaff
Bryan Levman

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of South Asian Languages and Linguistics · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicLinguistic Variation and Morphology
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLinguisticsVowelDiphthongObstruentConsonantHistoryComputer scienceMathematicsPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The earliest recoverable language of Buddhism is a Middle Indo-Aryan (MIA) koine , an inter-dialect language which reduced linguistic variability by dialect levelling and simplification, through elimination of interdialect phonological differences which impede understanding, and harmonization of the different dialects to a common language intelligible across all dialects. Among the principal features of this koine the following can be identified: reduction of the distinction between voiced and unvoiced intervocalic stops; replacement of aspirated stops by aspirates only; replacement of diphthongs by a simple vowel; the assimilation or resolution of most consonant clusters; the merging of dental, retroflex and palatal sibilants; the interchange of a variety of liquids and labials. Among the various factors which led to the koine ’s formation, were other Indo-Aryan and non Indo-Aryan languages and koine whose phonetic constraints catalyzed and accelerated the development of MIA in certain directions, that is towards harmonization with their own phonological system which lacked such features as phonemic intervocalic voiced stops, aspirated stops, consonant clusters, etc., and had other features (like retroflexes) which Indo-Aryan lacked.

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)0.010
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 score0.730
Threshold uncertainty score0.998

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.010
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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.310
Teacher spread0.298 · 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 designNot applicable
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

Citations6
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of South Asian Languages and LinguisticsSame topicLinguistic Variation and MorphologyFrench-language works237,207