Agree and the subjects of specificational clauses
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract This article investigates agreement in Persian sentences with a specificational copular clause embedded under the epistemic modal tavānestan ‘can’. We argue that this structure is a raising structure. It exhibits agreement on both the embedded and modal verbs. Crucially, while the subject fails to control agreement in the embedded clause, it successfully controls agreement on the modal. We argue that the subject's failure to form an Agree relation in the embedded specificational clause is due to its defective feature structure, resulting in agreement with the lower noun phrase instead, this being an accessible goal as well. In the matrix clause, the lower noun phrase is inaccessible, due to the presence of an intervening domain boundary. This triggers probe reduction, a process that impoverishes the feature structure of the probe, expanding the set of possible goals to include the subject. We extend this analysis to subject agreement in simple specificational clauses in languages like 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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it