Timing properties of (Brazilian) Portuguese and (European) Spanish
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
Abstract Linguistic rhythmic or timing categories, usually defined in terms of isochrony, remain controversial as a meaningful typology for classifying languages, despite decades of research. Romance languages offer an opportunity to address this question since closely related languages are proposed to be at different ends of the typology. We test two such languages: European Spanish (ES) and Brazilian Portuguese (BP). Instead of investigating isochrony per se , however, we examine the interface between timing and prominence properties. Since duration is associated with prominence, we test the hypothesis that syllable-timed languages (ES) do not alter duration to express prominence, while non-syllable-timed languages (BP) do. Comparisons of lexical and sentential prominence effects on duration support our hypothesis, confirming the proposed distinction between the rhythmic classes of the two languages.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 it