MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3095949294 · doi:10.5539/ijel.v10n6p361

Clausal Ellipsis in Jibbali: The Case of Sluicing

2020· article· en· W3095949294 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Ali Algryani

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of English Linguistics · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicSyntax, Semantics, Linguistic Variation
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEllipsis (linguistics)LinguisticsSyntaxGenerative grammarComputer scienceGeneralizationPerspective (graphical)Movement (music)Parallelism (grammar)MathematicsArtificial intelligencePhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study investigates the syntax of sluicing in Jibbali from a generative perspective to identify its morphological and syntactic properties. It also seeks to provide an explanation for the preposition stranding sluices that seem to violate of the Preposition Stranding Generalization (PSG) posited by Merchant (2001). The study concludes that sluicing exists in Jibbali and that it results from an overt wh-movement operation plus IP ellipsis at PF. Furthermore, it is argued that Jibbali sluicing allows for two sources of clausal ellipsis, referred to herein as sluicing and pseudosluicing. Both sluicing and pseudosluicing are derived by wh-movement and TP deletion despite the fact that sluicing stems from regular wh-questions, whereas pseudosluicing derives from a copular underlying source, i.e., cleft wh-questions. With regards to preposition-less (P-less) sluices, it is argued that such sluices are instances of pseudosluicing and that they do not involve preposition stranding as wh-movement in pseudosluicing proceeds from Spec TP. The proposed analysis for both forms of clausal ellipsis rests upon two arguments: a) the analysis of pronouns in the elided clause as copular pronouns, and b) the restriction on clefting non-nominal expressions in Jibbali which mirrors the parallelism between P-less sluices and cleft wh-questions in the language.

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 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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.097
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.739
Threshold uncertainty score0.911

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.097
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.036
GPT teacher head0.274
Teacher spread0.238 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of English LinguisticsSame topicSyntax, Semantics, Linguistic VariationFrench-language works237,207