Discourse level variable licensing.<i>Par exemple</i>in Quebec French
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 phrasepar exemplein Quebec French has two possible meanings: an illustrative one and a contrastive one. We argue that contrastivepar exempleadjoins 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 contrastivepar exempleadjoins to, although similar to that of polarity sensitive items, actually differs from the latter in important respects. Just like polarity sensitive items, the [XPpar 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 [XPpar exemple] is a discourse level connector (i.e. a connector that relates the sentence that containspar exemplewith 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.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.010 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".