MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2547732919 · doi:10.1515/ling-2015-0044

Uniqueness and grammatical relations in Upper Necaxa Totonac

2016· article· en· W2547732919 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.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueLinguistics · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicSyntax, Semantics, Linguistic Variation
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
FundersSocial Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada
KeywordsUniquenessAxiomLinguisticsObject (grammar)Universal grammarGrammarRelation (database)AgreementMathematicsComputer sciencePhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The Principle of the Uniqueness of Grammatical Relations, which requires that all grammatical relations be distinguishable on morphological and/or syntactic grounds and non-repeatable in a clause, is often assumed to be a universal requirement of language and is a central tenet, explicit or implicit, of many theories of grammar. Upper Necaxa Totonac offers an apparent exception to this principle in that it has clauses with multiple objects that seem grammatically identical, yet do not appear to be adjuncts as they control agreement and are active in processes such as reciprocalization. Extensive testing of the properties of Upper Necaxa objects shows that, while a primary object can be distinguished on the basis of a single diagnostic, any remaining objects are indistinguishable and so must be treated as being governed by the same grammatical relation which is, therefore, non-unique. This data requires a reconsideration of the Uniqueness Principle as an absolute universal, and as an axiom or a necessary tenet of theories of human 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.

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)0.008
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.488
Threshold uncertainty score0.929

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.245
Teacher spread0.221 · 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