Quantity judgment studies in Yudja (Tupi): Acquisition and interpretation of nouns
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper explores the acquisition path and interpretation of substance and object nouns in Yudja, a Brazilian indigenous language. Based on quantity judgment tasks (Barner & Snedeker 2005), we show that children accept both cardinal and non-cardinal interpretations for all nouns (object and substance denoting nouns), while adults strongly favor a cardinal interpretation for all nouns, including substance nouns. We will use the results from these studies to support three theoretical claims from the literature. First, that the pattern observed for adults corroborates previous analyses of Yudja according to which maximal self-connected concrete portions of a kind can be considered as atoms and can be counted (Lima 2014). Second, that counting does not require natural atomicity (cf. Rothstein 2010). Third, that the definition of atoms for counting is the result of lexical, syntactic and pragmatic factors and does not depend solely on the lexical meaning of a noun (cf. Srinivasan & Barner 2016).
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 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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it