Medio adverbio, medio prefijo: la evolución de medio como modificador de verbos en español
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The work focuses on the study of medio (half) as a modifier of finite verbs, in respect to both the position of medio in relation to proclitic unstressed pronouns ( and ) and the aspectual types of verbal predicates with which it is combined. Of all the possible patterns for positioning pronouns, the first example is far better documented (16 th and 17 th centuries). From the 19 th century onwards, medio in combination with an unstressed pronoun starts to frequently act as an adverbial, rather than a prefixal, since there are more cases that show than in the reverse order. On the other hand, throughout the history of Spanish medio has spread its area of action, in such a way in the 16 th -18 th centuries it was basically used to modify telic verbs, yet in the 19 th century it increased its use as a modifier of atelic verbs, although there is a predominance of the former. Furthermore, the two readings (aspectual and evaluative) that have been identified in present-day Spanish show that from the first documentations, medio is used as a modifier of finite verbs (16 th century), although to a different degree. Lastly, it can be seen how the distributional change of medio in relation with an unstressed pronoun ( se medio cerro > medio se cerro ) (it half closed > half it closed) occurs at the same time the use of medio was extended from being an aspectual modifier to an evaluative modifier.
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 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 | 0.015 | 0.011 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.005 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.014 | 0.022 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".