On Possessive, Existential and Locative Clause Types in the Haisla Language
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 is intended to provide a preliminary overview of how possessive, existential and locative clause types are structured in Haisla, a Wakashan language spoken in British Columbia, Canada. Possessive and existential clauses are structured according to two patterns: (1) Deriving a denominal verb with the meaning ‘to have X’/’there is/are X’ with a derivational suffix. (2) Using a clause in which the predicate expresses thenumber, thequantity or a quality of the possessee or the entity whose existence is in question. Thevery productive suffix -nuxʷ can be used to form both possessive and existential clauses while another suffix -[z]ad seems to be possible to be used mainly for possessive clauses only. Locative clauses are structured with thelocative verb laa‘to (be) locate(d) in/at’or with a locative stem as the predicate. When the locative verb is used, the location is expressed with an independentnoun phrase or prepositional phrase.Some problematic data concerning word order in locative clauses and inalienability in the possessive clauses is shown. Also, the difference between possessive constructions and constructions denoting belonging is discussed.
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 | 0.000 | 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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