MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W7005718891

The Rhotic Consonant(s) in Contemporary Modern Irish

2022· other· en· W7005718891 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueYork University Digital Library (York University) · 2022
Typeother
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicInsect-Plant Interactions and Control
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIrishSubject (documents)HickeyPhonologyPoliticsCapital (architecture)
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The subject of this major research paper (MRP) is the status of rhotic consonant(s) in the phonemic inventory of Modern Irish (Gaeilge, Nua-Ghaeilge). Traditional studies of the phonologies of dialects of Irish have described the rhotic in Irish as consisting of the alveolar tap (/ɾ/) with contrastive palatalized and velarized secondary articulations (/ɾj/ and /ɾɣ/) (Ó Cuív 1944; de Bhaldraithe 1966; Hamilton 1974; Sutton 1993; Ó Baoill 1996; Ó Raghallaigh 2014). The alveolar approximate ([ɹ]) as an allophone of /ɾ/ has also recently been attested in some studies (Ó Sé 2000: 19; Hickey 2014; Kukhto & Nikolaev 2016). However, the emergence of this allophone, and the precise circumstances under which it occurs, have largely been unexplored. This is not to say that previous scholars have ignored the occurrence of /ɹ/ broadly, but potentially that this is a new and ongoing phenomenon. As an example, previous work of the rhotic of Montréal French has shown that changes like this can occur rapidly (Sankoff & Blondeau 2007). Most previous studies of Irish phonetics and phonology have focused on speakers living in a Gaeltacht, the rural traditionally Irish speaking geographic regions primarily located on the Atlantic fringe of the island. However, the expansion of private Irish-medium schooling in the form of Gaelscoileanna since the 1970’s, as well as substantial sustained capital and political investment from successive Irish governments have produced a great number of high-level L2 users, as well as native speakers from non-Gaeltacht backgrounds. A part of the impetus to this research is to include these “new” speakers in the conversations around language change and variation in Irish as well, particularly as the Gaeltachtaí continue to be threatened and as “urban Irish” speakers begin to form a larger and larger portion of the language’s user base. There is also evidence uncovered in scholarly work that Irish phonology and phonetics are changing in other, broader ways, even amongst Gaeltacht speakers (Welby et al. 2017; Müller et al. 2019).

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.030
Threshold uncertainty score0.059

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.003
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.155
Teacher spread0.140 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
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

Citations0
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueYork University Digital Library (York University)→Same topicInsect-Plant Interactions and Control→French-language works237,207→