MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4378904959 · doi:10.5430/wjel.v13n6p196

The Syntactic Variations in Adverb Phrase ‘As well’ in Initial Position in Pakistani English (PakE): A Corpus Based Study

2023· article· en· W4378904959 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Muhammad Ali Imran

Bibliographic record

VenueWorld Journal of English Language · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicLinguistics, Language Diversity, and Identity
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAdverbLinguisticsPhraseSentenceComputer scienceAdjectiveNoun phraseVariation (astronomy)SyntaxNatural language processingArtificial intelligencePhysicsPhilosophyNounAstrophysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study aims to pinpoint the variations in Adverb Phrase ‘As well’ in the initial position in PakE, and investigate the influence of the substrate linguistic effect of the Urdu language on PakE. For this study, a corpus GlowbE-PK was utilized. In total, 192 Adverb phrases in the initial position of the sentence were found. This study utilized the mixed method research and also kept in view the Sociolinguistic Variation and World Englishes conventions of research.The number and frequency of tokens per million words were calculated. Overall, PakE reveals a frequency of 3.84% per 1 million words. The results and discussions indicated a noticeable variation in the Adverb phrase of PakE from Standard BrE. This research also confirms the negative linguistic influence of the substrate language Urdu on Pakistani English in the use of the Adverb phrase 'As well', although the substrate language clearly shows the influence on many other features of PakE, as in Adjective phrase – the use of Double comparatives and superlatives. Furthermore, this research identifies the same feature Adverb phrase ‘as well’ in other varieties of English.

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 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)0.012
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.139
Threshold uncertainty score0.996

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.012
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.264
Teacher spread0.250 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designQualitative
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

Citations1
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueWorld Journal of English LanguageSame topicLinguistics, Language Diversity, and IdentityFrench-language works237,207