Discourse level variable licensing.<i>Par exemple</i>in Quebec French
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract This paper reports the existence of a type of lexical item that has gone unnoticed in the previous literature. We start from the observation that the phrase par exemple in Quebec French has two possible meanings: an illustrative one and a contrastive one. We argue that contrastive par exemple adjoins to constituents that are similar to polarity sensitive items and thus marks sensitivity of the respective XP to a certain property of the environment. The syntactic distribution of the XP to which contrastive par exemple adjoins to, although similar to that of polarity sensitive items, actually differs from the latter in important respects. Just like polarity sensitive items, the [XP par exemple ] constituent must be in the scope of an operator. However, unlike polarity sensitive items, which are licensed by operators that are defined at sentence level, the licensor of contrastive [XP par exemple ] is a discourse level connector (i.e. a connector that relates the sentence that contains par exemple with a previous, independently expressed sentence). This implies that discourse connectors do more than simply relate two propositions: given that they also licence variables, they also have operator properties.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it