Interpreting derived stative predicates : evidence from ʔayʔaǰuθəm
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This thesis explores the semantic properties of a verb affix analyzed by Watanabe (2003) as marking stative aspect in ʔayʔaǰuθəm. Also known as Comox-Sliammon, ʔayʔaǰuθəm is a critically endangered Central Salish language spoken on the central west coast of British Columbia, Canada. As Nedjalkov and Jaxontov define them, (1988, p. 6), pure stative readings express “a state without any implication of its origin” (e.g. the village is surrounded by mountains), while resultative readings express “both a state and the preceding action it has resulted from” (e.g. the village is surrounded by soldiers). Predicates derived by the ʔayʔaǰuθəm stativizer were tested in elicitation with native speakers which was targeted to clarify what kinds of context these predicates can occur in and what readings are possible. It was found that despite being derived from eventive roots, these predicates may be interpreted as pure stative rather than resultative. A new representation of the affect of stative morphology on an eventive predicate is provided based on this evidence from ʔayʔaǰuθəm to address the analytical paradox that arises from stative predicates, derived from eventive roots, being interpreted as pure states. It is proposed that the different possible readings of a stativized predicate in ʔayʔaǰuθəm arise out of pragmatics, requiring no semantic or syntactic ambiguity and not violating monotonicity. Essentially, the analysis states that derived stative predicates denote the contextually most informative and least superfluous of the states associated with the predicate, evaluated against a set of Questions Under Discussion (Roberts, 1996).
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".