Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract This chapter reports studies of parallelism in VP-ellipsis in two populations whose linguistic ability is lacking. First, a complex comprehension experiment was conducted with individuals with Broca’s aphasia, said to suffer from a specific syntactic deficit that some view as restricted to the deletion of traces of movement, while others argue is related to “complexity.” Though still at a preliminary stage, the experimental record suggests that parallelism, as evinced by the patients’ ability to reconstruct elided VPs, is relatively intact for these patients, indicating that their deficit is restricted. Second, a similar study was run with normally developing, 4–5-year-old children, whose linguistic abilities are not yet fully manifested. Nevertheless, these children use parallelism in an adult-like fashion, and correctly reconstruct elided material in comprehension. We also provide evidence that 3-year-olds use elided VPs in spontaneous language production. Both studies are used to argue for fine deficit analyses, and against generic, “complexity”-based accounts of language development and language loss.
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 | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".