The possibilities of using the real-time and apparent-time method in insular German dialectology for describing lexical variability
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
Traditionally, insular German dialects existing in various regions of the world (Russia, Romania, Hungary, Brazil, Argentina, the USA, Canada, etc.) are studied from the perspectives of classical dialectology, language history, historical semantics, and linguistic contactology. The aim of this study is to define the range of phenomena of lexical and semantic variability in dialectal vocabulary, in the investigation of which the real-time and apparent-time methods can be employed. This method has only been fragmentarily used in domestic German studies for examining phonetic variability in Low German dialects in Russia. The scientific novelty lies in the fact that, for the first time in domestic Germanistics, the possibility of applying this method to the lexical system of insular German dialects is demonstrated on specific linguistic data obtained by researchers during dialectological expeditions conducted over various periods (from the 1930s to the present). As a result, it is proven that the use of this method allows tracing the dynamics of linguistic processes by comparing different periods of development of insular dialects, taking into account the particular sociolinguistic and linguistic situations of speakers of various dialect groups in conditions of a foreign-language environment and inter-dialectal mixing.
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 | 0.009 | 0.018 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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