An Optimality-theoretic Approach to Weight of Superheavy Syllables in Qassimi Arabic
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The ultimate purpose of this paper is to investigate the distribution of superheavy syllables (i.e. CVVC and CVCC) in Qassimi Arabic (QA), a sub-dialect of Najdi Arabic, which is mainly spoken in central Saudi Arabia, particularly, in the cities of Qassim Region. In order to do this, an Optimality-theoretic account is used to account for the moraic structures of these superheavy syllables. In general, the study finds out that CVVC and CVCC are both allowed to surface in Qassimi Arabic in final and non-final positions. Furthermore, using mora-sharing analysis (Broselow 1992; Broselow et al. 1995 and 1997; Watson 2007), the study observes the occurrence of CVVC and CVCC both in word-finally and word-internally. In particular, the study maintains that by proposing the dominant of (MORAICCODA) constraint over (FINAL-C-μ) constraint, the analysis of mora-sharing is superior to that of extrametricality. Thus, the paper suggests that the notion that all coda consonants in Arabic are moraic, including the last consonants of final-CVC syllables (Broselow et al. 1997).
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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".