MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W303230980 · doi:10.7282/t3hd7tgr

Consonant cluster phonotactics: a perceptual approach

2000· dissertation· en· W303230980 on OpenAlex

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.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueRutgers University Community Repository (Rutgers University) · 2000
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicPhonetics and Phonology Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPhonotacticsConsonant clusterPerceptionCluster (spacecraft)Computer scienceCognitive psychologyPsychologyArtificial intelligenceConsonantNatural language processingSpeech recognitionLinguisticsPhonologyPhilosophyProgramming languageNeuroscience

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This dissertation deals with deletion and epenthesis processes conditioned or constrained by the consonantal environment, essentially consonant deletion, vowel epenthesis, and vowel deletion. It is argued that the standard generative approach to these processes, which relies on the syllable and the principle of prosodic licensing, is empirically inadequate, and an alternative sequential approach based on perceptual factors is developed. It is proposed that the likelihood that a consonant deletes, triggers epenthesis, or blocks vowel deletion correlates with the quality and quantity of the auditory cues associated to it in a given context. The approach is implemented in Optimality Theory and adopts more specifically the ‘Licensing by cue’ framework developed by Steriade (1999a,c). New empirical gneralizations concerning deletion and epenthesis processes are uncovered, in particular 1) the fact that stops are more likely than other consonants to delete, trigger epenthesis, or block deletion; 2) the role of syntagmatic contrast in deletion and epenthesis processes; 3) the role of the audibility of stop release bursts; 4) the existence of cumulative edge effects, whereby more and more phonotactic combinations are licensed at the edges of prosodic domains as we go up the prosodic hierarchy. These generalizations are elucidated in terms of internal and contextual cues, modulation in the acoustic signal, and cue enhancement processes at edges of prosodic domains. The proposed perceptual approach achieves a substantial simplification and unification of the conceptual apparatus necessary to analyze deletion and epenthesis processes. It subsumes under the more general notion of perceptual salience principles of syllable well-formedness and the Obligatory Contour Principle. Furthermore, it eliminates the need for exceptional mechanisms such as extrasyllabicity at domain edges. The analysis is based on the study of deletion and epenthesis processes in a variety of languages. Detailed investigations of schwa in Parisian French, cluster simplification in Quebec French, and stop deletion and vowel epenthesis in Ondarroa Basque are provided.

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)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies, Research integrity, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesResearch integrity
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.632
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0030.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0030.000
Research integrity0.0020.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.257
Teacher spread0.235 · 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