Bibliographic record
Abstract
The paper sheds light on the status of wh-elements in Central Kurdish (CK) with respect to the framework of the Minimalist Program (MP). From across the globe, there exist various types of languages whose wh-elements behave according to wh-parameter. There are languages whose wh-elements move, some others have in-situ wh-elements, and there are others in which the movement is optional. This paper aims to observe CK wh-elements in an empirical way to indicate their parametric features and their conformance to the universal principles. The notion of movement in MP is included within merge, which falls into two types: Internal merge (I-merge) and External merge (E-merge). Another important term in connection with overt movement is the Extended Projection Principle (EPP) according to which the subject position should be occupied by a phonologically expressed constituent. A fact to be known is that not all languages, among them CK, conform to this principle. The violation of certain CK wh-elements to this principle varies because they do not function in the same way. The paper consists of four sections: introduction, literature review, two basic concepts concerning wh-movement, and an empirical section observing CK wh-elements. It ends with the conclusion and references. One of the conclusions is that CK wh-elements are not considered as one inseparable set since they behave differently.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.007 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.008 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".