MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2396305666 · doi:10.5539/elt.v9n7p87

A Syntactic Account for the Power of Verbs within X-Phemism: A Corpus-Base Exploration

2016· article· en· W2396305666 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

VenueEnglish Language Teaching · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicSwearing, Euphemism, Multilingualism
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLinguisticsVerbPredicate (mathematical logic)ConceptualizationFocus (optics)GrammarPsychologyVerb phrasePhraseWord grammarNatural language processingSyntaxPhrase structure rulesComputer scienceArtificial intelligenceNoun phraseEmergent grammarNounPhilosophyRelational grammar

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

<p>The main aim of this paper is to examine the syntactic status of a selected text-corpus focus, with a special focus on the verb within its Verb-Phrase. The major claim is that the power of the verb in its VP is loaded syntactically through which the speaker’s desire of the doublespeak within X-Phemism is achieved. In order to fulfill this claim, a corpus-based exploration is applied on the selected data produced in Standard English. The analysis is accounted for a conceptualization of grammar that is based on general syntactic constraints on a well-formedness. The syntactic conceptualization (Chomsky, 2000; Ouhalla, 2002) is selected in its broad sense, as the basic framework where it best captures the syntactic role played by the verb-predicate and its various arguments.</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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.015
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.038
Threshold uncertainty score0.993

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.015
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
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 head0.028
GPT teacher head0.325
Teacher spread0.297 · 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