MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4385855213 · doi:10.59962/9780774850971

Musqueam Reference Grammar

2007· book· ru· W4385855213 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Wayne Suttles

Bibliographic record

VenueUniversity of British Columbia Press eBooks · 2007
Typebook
Languageru
FieldComputer Science
TopicNatural Language Processing Techniques
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGrammarComputer scienceLinguisticsNatural language processingPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Here is the long-awaited grammar of the Musqueam dialect of Halkomelem, which Wayne Suttles began work on in the late 1950s. The Musqueam people are the First Nation whose aboriginal territory includes much of the Fraser Delta and the city of Vancouver. Halkomelem, one of the twenty-three languages that belong to the Salish Family, is spoken in three distinct forms: Upriver, by the Stó:lo‘ of the Fraser Valley; Downriver, of which Musqueam is the only surviving representative; and Island, spoken by the Nanaimo and Cowichan of Vancouver Island. Suttles, an anthropologist, worked with knowledgeable older people, eliciting traditional stories, personal narratives, and ethnographic accounts. The grammar covers the usual topics of phonology, morphology, and syntax, illustrated by numerous sentences selected for their cultural relevance, providing insight into traditional practices, social relations, and sense of humour. There are also chapters on kinship and on space and time as well as five texts and appendices giving an index of grammatical elements, names of places and peoples, and the history of work on Halkomelem. It is written using the terms of traditional grammar as much as possible, without following a particular theoretical perspective. Musqueam Reference Grammar is perhaps the fullest account of any Salish language. It will be welcomed by linguists, anthropologists, and the Musqueam people.

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)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Research integrity
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.817
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0050.003
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.213
Teacher spread0.194 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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

Citations9
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueUniversity of British Columbia Press eBooksSame topicNatural Language Processing TechniquesFrench-language works237,207