Bibliographic record
Abstract
This research aims to examine the Englyn meter in the poetry of Celtic language (Medieval Welsh) that requires the poetic texts to conform to an abstract prosodic template. This counting meter regulates the phonological constituency on the same metric level of the prosodic hierarchy rather than on the metrical hierarchy in verse (the line). In the main types of Englyn meters, Englyn milwr and Englyn penfyr, phonological units of each line are constrained with a certain number of syllables and rhyme with the final syllable of most lines. This research offers a markedness-based analysis that generates the well-formedness meter of Celtic language Welsh poetry. The Optimality Theoretical analysis derives the constraint on the phonological constituency over a certain metric level of the prosodic hierarchy (the line) with markedness constraints. Further coping constraints that are normally used for reduplication are needed to account for the rhyme of the final syllable in Englyn meter. The analysis offered supports the Development hypothesis, which is fundamental to generative metrics indicating that meter is evidently related to general language phonology. These results could help analyse other counting meters with restricted phonological constituency.
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 | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".