MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4255238406 · doi:10.1162/002438902760168554

Decomposing Pronouns

2002· article· en· W4255238406 on OpenAlexaff
Rose‐Marie Déchaine, Martina Wiltschko

Bibliographic record

VenueLinguistic Inquiry · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicSyntax, Semantics, Linguistic Variation
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPronounLinguisticsSubject pronounPredicate (mathematical logic)Object pronounReflexive pronounArgument (complex analysis)Computer scienceMathematicsPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Starting with the idea that the notion “pronoun” is not a primitive of linguistic theory, we propose that it is necessary to recognize (at least) three pronoun types: pro-DP, pro-fP, and pro-NP. Evidence supporting this three-way split comes from the sensitivity of certain proforms to the predicate/argument distinction, the internal structure of proforms, and the binding-theoretic properties of proforms. Recognizing different pronoun types also sheds light on the formal (dis)similarities between obviation and switch-reference.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.013
Threshold uncertainty score0.044

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0020.006
Scholarly communication0.0050.011
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0130.002

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 head0.072
GPT teacher head0.270
Teacher spread0.199 · 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

Citations449
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueLinguistic InquirySame topicSyntax, Semantics, Linguistic VariationFrench-language works237,207