One, but not the same: on complex event-formation in Igbo serial verb constructions
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 paper presents the first formal event semantic analysis of two prominent types of serial verb construction (SVC) in Igbo (Benue-Congo), namely multi-event and sequential SVCs. Both SVC types are composed of two or more transitive verbs and appear to be similar on the surface, but they differ with respect to the property of internal argument sharing (Baker 1989). Based on the different formal semantic mechanisms proposed for complex event formation in the literature, we develop a catalogue of diagnostics for identifying the semantic mechanisms at play in different SVC configurations, both within and across languages. Applying the diagnostics to multi-event and sequential SVCs in Igbo, we show that the two SVC types come with different semantic properties, which correlate with the syntactic property of [+/−] object sharing. Whereas SVCs without OBJ-sharing denote conjunctions of proposition-denoting extended verbal projections, OBJ-sharing SVCs involve a tighter event construal, conceptualised as a complex process event or macro-event (Stewart in The serial verb construction parameter. McGill, New York, 1998; Pietroski in Causing Actions. Oxford University Press, Oxford, 2000; Events and Semantic Architecture. Oxford University Press, Oxford, 2005; Williams in Arguments in syntax and semantics. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2015a; Bohnemeyer et al. in Language 83(3):495–532, 2007). We propose a formal analysis of OBJ-sharing sequential SVCs as denoting complex events with quantificational substructure.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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