Phonological Substitution is Motivated by Adjacent Phonological Features: Evidence from Classical Arabic
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This article aims at investigating phonological substitution in classical Arabic. I hypothesise that consonantal and vocalic substitution is motivated by phonological features of adjacent consonantal or vocalic segments. Data of the study were collected from classical Arabic literary works in Aldiwan – encyclopaedia of Arabic poetry. Data were analysed in the framework of Chomsky and Halle’s SPE theory. Findings of the study have revealed that phonological features of consonantal or vocalic segments motivate other adjacent consonants to undergo a phonological substitution process in specific phonological contexts in classical Arabic. It has been revealed that the glide /w/ surfaces as /t/ when it is followed by /t/ or as /j/ when it occurs between two vowels, the first of which is high short /i/ and the second is low long /aː/, word-internally. The phoneme /t/ becomes /ṭ/ when it is preceded by /ṣ/, /ḍ/, /ṭ/ or /ð̣/ across a syllable, and it surfaces as /d/ when it is preceded by /d/, /z/ or /ð/ word-internally. It has been also found that the long vowels /aː, iː, uː/ replace glide phonemes in vocalic substitution processes when glides are adjacent to corresponding short vowels either word-internally or word-finally.
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 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 | 0.001 | 0.087 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 0.003 |
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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".