MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2476220937 · doi:10.1075/la.130.10hil

5. Romanian clitic doubling: A view from pragmatics-semantics and diachrony

2008· book-chapter· en· W2476220937 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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueLinguistik aktuell · 2008
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicLinguistics, Language Diversity, and Identity
Canadian institutionsUniversity of New Brunswick
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRomanianPragmaticsCliticLinguisticsSemantics (computer science)Computer scienceProgramming languagePhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper argues that an approach to the Romanian C(litic) D(oubling) from a pragmatics-semantics perspective produces a systematic account for three peculiarities of this construction; namely, the obligatory particle pe preceding the D(irect) O(bject) dp, the interaction between this type of marking and the insertion of a doubling clitic, and the DO/I(ndirect) O(bject) asymmetry in the conditions for CD. In particular, speech act effects emerging from the presence versus absence of pe lead us to define this element as a pragmatic marker for prominence in these configurations. Its interaction with the doubling clitic depends on the semantics of reference: only an acceptable degree of stable reference of the dp allows for the coocurrence with a clitic (i.e., for the CD of DOs). These constraints do not extend to the CD of IOs. We consider that an acceptable degree of stable reference is intrinsically ensured in Romanian CD with IOs because of the matching morphological endings for Oblique Case on both the clitic and the dp; prominence , on the other hand, emerges from the high location of IOs on the topicality scale (i.e., close to Agent-like theta-roles), in contrast to the low location of DOs (i.e., close to Theme-like theta-roles). Thus, IOs meet the pragmatic prominence conditions for CD due to their morpho-semantics, whereas DOs need categorial marking (i.e., pe ) to qualify for this process. An overview of the CD in three texts of Old Romanian attests a gradual emergence of the modern CD that supports our analysis.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.846
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.035
GPT teacher head0.209
Teacher spread0.174 · 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