Person and Licensing in Georgian: Puzzles for Cyclic Agree
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Cyclic Agree and the Person Licensing Condition predict ungrammaticality for a wide range of argument combinations in Georgian, incorrectly, though both have been used to explain core argument agreement in the language. This problem is defused by positing a high phi-probe on T, in addition to a previously proposed low articulated probe on v. The higher phi-probe is independently observable as added verbal morphology: a suffix-ablaut system. The high phi-probe is obligatory and this creates interactions between agreement loci as a result of general mechanisms (probe unification). A comparison between Georgian and Basque reveals systematic differences attributable to a contrast in the distribution of obligatory probes: the Georgian phi-probe on T is obligatory, while in Basque it is added to satisfy the PLC. This explains a difference between the languages with respect to alignment: intransitive S in Basque is consistently tracked by inflection characteristic of the v probe, while intransitive S in Georgian is consistently tracked by inflection characteristic of the T probe. Details of the interactions between agreement loci support a view of cyclicity where syntactic operations apply freely up to convergence, suggesting that cyclicity follows from Minimal Search or No-Tampering rather than Earliness.
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 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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".