MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4388778602 · doi:10.54563/lexique.85

Vers une modélisation lexicographique des propriétés sémantico-pragmatiques des locutions-phrases génériques et situationnelles La nuit porte conseil et Le chat est sorti du sac

2021· article· en· W4388778602 on OpenAlexaff
Gaétane Dostie

Bibliographic record

VenueLexique · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicLinguistics and Discourse Analysis
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Sherbrooke
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLinguisticsImplicatureMeaning (existential)AdverbialPragmaticsGricePhraseSentenceTheme (computing)Computer scienceForegroundingPsychologyPhilosophyEpistemology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article focuses on two categories of ready-made phrases, called generic idiomatic phrases and situational idiomatic phrases. In summary, these sentences are characterized as follows: – they are presented, by the speaker/writer, as descriptions of the world; – they refer or purport to refer to states of fact (although they may implicitly perform illocutionary expressive and/or directive acts); – they acquire their legitimacy according to the discursive theme. The aim is to propose a lexicographical modelling for the kinds of sentences studied. The proposals are inspired by the methodology underlying the elaboration of definitions in the Explanatory and Combinatorial Dictionary (Mel'čuk et al., 1984, 1988, 1992, 1999). Briefly, the semantic-pragmatic analysis scheme sketched reflects 1) the conventional meaning (codified in language) associated with the phrases studied, and 2) the meaning possibly communicated through a generalized implicature (Grice, 1979 [1975]). Close attention is paid to the actions performed by language, which is an inescapable matter whenever statements are involved. The study ends with the presentation of dictionary articles prepared for the generic idiomatic phrase La nuit porte conseil and for the situational idiomatic phrase Le chat est sorti du sac.

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)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.214
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.046
GPT teacher head0.298
Teacher spread0.252 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations2
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueLexiqueSame topicLinguistics and Discourse AnalysisFrench-language works237,207