MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2492140754 · doi:10.1075/cilt.313.10ros

Stress domain effects in French phonology and phonological development

2010· article· en· W2492140754 on OpenAlexaffabout
Yvan Rose, Christophe dos Santos

Bibliographic record

VenueAmsterdam studies in the theory and history of linguistic science. Series 4, Current issues in linguistic theory · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicPhonetics and Phonology Research
Canadian institutionsMemorial University of Newfoundland
FundersEunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development
KeywordsVowel harmonySyllablePhonologyLinguisticsStress (linguistics)Phonological ruleCodaComputer scienceSpeech recognitionNatural language processingAcousticsPhysicsPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this paper, we discuss two distinct data sets. The first relates to the so-called allophonic process of closed-syllable laxing in Québec French, which targets final (stressed) vowels even though these vowels are arguably syllabified in open syllables in lexical representations. The second is found in the forms produced by a first language learner of European French, who displays an asymmetry in her production of CVC versus CVCV target (adult) forms. The former display full preservation (with concomitant manner harmony) of both consonants. The latter undergoes deletion of the initial syllable if the consonants are not manner-harmonic in the input. We argue that both patterns can be explained through a phonological process of prosodic strengthening targeting the head of the prosodic domain which, in the contexts described above, yields the incorporation of final consonants into the coda of the stressed syllable.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.014

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.041
GPT teacher head0.374
Teacher spread0.334 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations9
Published2010
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAmsterdam studies in the theory and history of linguistic science. Series 4, Current issues in linguistic theorySame topicPhonetics and Phonology ResearchFrench-language works237,207