A big city perspective on<i>come/came</i>variation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract This study examines the alternation between non-standard preterite come and its standard counterpart came in London English. A major component of the investigation centers on the comparison of come/came variation in the speech of Anglo (British-heritage) and non-Anglo (migrant-heritage) youth. Rates of preterite come vary markedly across different age cohorts and minority ethnic groups, foregrounding the importance of social factors as key determinants of variant use. By contrast, the internal conditioning of variant selection is not robust, as inferred from the paucity of significant linguistic effects. Similarities in variable patterning in elderly and adolescent Anglo speaker groups nevertheless suggest that shared structural affinities may be due to historical transmission. Conversely, comparison of Anglo and non-Anglo adolescents’ use of come/came variation reveals fewer correspondences in the grammar underlying variable use. The results demonstrate that data from non-Anglo groups contribute to a fuller understanding of come/came variation in an ethnically diverse metropolis.
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 | 0.003 | 0.139 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".