Locality Domains in Syntax: Evidence from Sentence Processing
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 One of the main discoveries of generative syntax is that long‐distance extraction proceeds in a successive‐cyclic manner, in that these dependencies are comprised of a sequence of local extraction steps. This article provides support for this general picture by presenting novel parsing evidence for intermediate landing sites created by successive‐cyclic movement, and it uses this parsing evidence to investigate the distribution of intermediate gaps. The central findings of this article are that (i) there is evidence that successive‐cyclic movement targets the edge of CPs and that (ii) there is no comparable evidence for an intermediate landing site at vP edges. These findings are fully consistent with the classical view of successive cyclicity, according to which only finite‐clause edges host intermediate landing sites. In the context of phase theory, these results receive a straightforward explanation if CPs are phases but vPs are not. The processing evidence presented here thus provides a novel diagnostic for the distribution of phases and new evidence for their active role in online sentence processing.
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 | 0.002 |
| 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 it