MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2906263390 · doi:10.4000/corela.6981

Les locutions verbales et les constructions à verbe support en français L2

2018· article· fr· W2906263390 on OpenAlex
Alma Bulut, Adel Jebali

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.

Bibliographic record

VenueCognition représentation langages · 2018
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldPsychology
TopicSecond Language Acquisition and Learning
Canadian institutionsConcordia University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesPhilosophySociologyPsychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

L’objectif de ce travail de recherche est d’étudier la distinction formelle entre les locutions verbales et les constructions à verbe support telles qu’elles sont présentées et décrites par les chercheurs travaillant dans le cadre théorique du lexique-grammaire. Dans ce but, nous avons conçu quatre tâches que nous avons proposées à nos deux groupes de participants : des locuteurs natifs du français et des apprenants du FL2. Nous avons testé plusieurs aspects de la maîtrise des constructions verbales complexes en français par nos participants en mettant en lumière les différences dans les tâches de perception ainsi que dans les tâches de production des structures ciblées. Cette étude démontre que, bien que la perception des structures verbales complexes par les apprenants du FL2 soit assez semblable à celle des locuteurs natifs de cette langue, leur production représente un aspect assez difficile pour les premiers.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.590
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.3040.010

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 head0.043
GPT teacher head0.394
Teacher spread0.351 · 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