Relating production and perception in two Raglai dialects at different stages of registrogenesis
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
This paper explores the perception of two diachronically related and mutually intelligible phonological oppositions, the onset voicing contrast of Northern Raglai and the register contrast of Southern Raglai. It is the continuation of a previous acoustic study that revealed that Northern Raglai onset stops maintain a voicing distinction accompanied by weak formant and voice quality modulations on following vowels, while Southern Raglai has transphonologized this voicing contrast into a register contrast marked by vowel and voice quality distinctions. Our findings indicate that the two dialects partially differ in their use of identification cues, Northern Raglai listeners using both voicing and F1 as major cues while Southern Raglai listeners largely focus on F1. Production and perception are thus not perfectly aligned in Northern Raglai, because F1 plays a stronger role in perception than production in this dialect. We conclude that mutual intelligibility between dialects is possible because they both use F1 for identification.
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