Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper describes and proposes an analysis of relative clauses in Mẽbengokre, a Je language from the eastern Amazon region of Brazil. Relative clauses in this language are normally internally-headed, and the verbal predicate within them assumes a nominal form, triggering ergative alignment. The description of relative clauses addresses first (Section.2) their internal characteristics, i.e. ergative case marking, absence of morphological marking of the head of the relative clause, absence of some of the TAM categories present in main clauses, and the fact that internal heads can be omitted, yielding “free relative” constructions; Section.3 describes their external characteristics, i.e. their peculiar distribution within the clause, which often requires displacement to a left-peripheral focus position, the determiners and classifiers that may occur outside of the relative clause, and the possibility of some heads being external to the relative clause, among other topics. The main thrust of our analysis of relative clauses is to show (Section.4) that they are not adjuncts of any sort, but rather self-contained noun phrases. In light of this idea, we analyze all “adjectival” modification within a noun phrase as having a predicative structure identical to that of relative clauses. The paper concludes by arguing that the proposed analysis of relative clauses illustrates a striking property of M.bengokre, namely the systematic ambiguity between modifiers and heads found in all nominal expressions in the language.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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; 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".