The Syntactic Variations in Adverb Phrase ‘As well’ in Initial Position in Pakistani English (PakE): A Corpus Based Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
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 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 | 0.001 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".