MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4251768361 · doi:10.1075/sibil.52.09mer

Cross-linguistic influence in scope ambiguity

2017· book-chapter· en· W4251768361 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueStudies in bilingualism · 2017
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicSyntax, Semantics, Linguistic Variation
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsScope (computer science)AmbiguityLinguisticsComputer sciencePhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Cross-linguistic influence of interface-conditioned properties in bilingual language acquisition has been reported in a large number of studies and various linguistic domains. While many of these studies have found that cross-linguistic influence can occur in the form of delay, few have shown evidence for acceleration (a.o., Kupisch, 2007 ; Meisel, 2007 ; Schwartz, Nir, Leikin, Levie, & Ravid, 2014 ). In this paper we investigate the interpretation of indefinites in sentences containing negation by simultaneous bilingual (2L1) English-Dutch and Italian-Dutch children. Our results provide evidence for cross-linguistic influence from Italian to Dutch in the form of acceleration, only. We conclude that in cases of partial overlap between a bilingual child’s two languages, the direction of cross-linguistic influence can also depend on language-internal properties.

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.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.014
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Meta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.613
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.014
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.102
GPT teacher head0.366
Teacher spread0.264 · 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