MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3117180947 · doi:10.5539/ijel.v11n2p1

A Prototypical Model on Hakka Serial Verb Constructions

2020· article· en· W3117180947 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Yu‐Ching Tseng

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of English Linguistics · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicSyntax, Semantics, Linguistic Variation
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsVerbComputer scienceScope (computer science)SyntaxInterdependenceModal verbLinguisticsNatural language processingComponent (thermodynamics)Artificial intelligenceCausativeSemantics (computer science)Interface (matter)Meaning (existential)Programming languagePsychologySociology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This research paper provides a meaning-based account to examining Hakka syntactic constructions that comprise multiple verbs in their scope. The investigation is based on an interdisciplinary approach from the interface of syntax and semantics. The paper is organized into two main parts. The first part of this paper claims that the prototypical construction of the serial verb construction is a syntactic configuration that contains two verbs in the same clause, indicating two interdependent subevents happening at close time intervals. In addition, the paper proposes that greater distance in structural and semantic interdependence between the two verbs forms a gradation deviating from the prototype. In this part, a prototype model, rather than a criterial attribute model, is adopted to define the Hakka serial verb construction (SVC). The second part of paper provides a typological study that classifies the Hakka SVCs into subtypes based on the syntactic structure and the semantic relationship of the component verbs. Syntactic tests are used to test the clausehood of the multi-verb constructions identified in this part.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.014

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.006
Scholarly communication0.0020.005
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.039
GPT teacher head0.268
Teacher spread0.229 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
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