MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4231369226 · doi:10.1017/s0008413100001274

Conditional morphology in si-clauses: A Canadian-French reanalysis

2009· article· en· W4231369226 on OpenAlexaffabout
Carmen L. LeBlanc

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Canadian Journal of Linguistics / La revue canadienne de linguistique · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicSyntax, Semantics, Linguistic Variation
Canadian institutionsCarleton University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLinguisticsSubordinatorContext (archaeology)ImperfectUtteranceVerbComponent (thermodynamics)Dependent clauseVariable (mathematics)HistorySentenceMathematicsPhilosophyStatistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract This article reports on a synchronic analysis in the surface variation between the conditional and the imperfect or pluperfect indicative in hypothetical clauses headed by the subordinator si . The empirical basis of the study is a corpus of French spoken in the national capital region of Canada, which comprises 120 informants. The study also has a diachronic component concerning the evolution of the variable based on a collection of published works since Early Modern French. The most interesting aspect of the results is the system wherein the morphological exponent of the verb is determined by the modal reading of the utterance. It is revealed that this grammatical trait was attested at earlier steps in the development of the language and that it helps to resolve a form-function asymmetry resulting from use of the indicative imperfect in a conditional context.

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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.155
Threshold uncertainty score0.312

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.004
Science and technology studies0.0020.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0100.001

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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.232
Teacher spread0.214 · 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 designNot applicable
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

Citations5
Published2009
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Canadian Journal of Linguistics / La revue canadienne de linguistiqueSame topicSyntax, Semantics, Linguistic VariationFrench-language works237,207