MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W7066159842

Hiatus and Hiatus Resolution in Québécois French

2012· dissertation· en· W7066159842 on OpenAlexvenueno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueLibrary and Archives Canada (Government of Canada) · 2012
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicAstrophysical Phenomena and Observations
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLimitingTerm (time)NasalizationNoise (video)Context (archaeology)
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This thesis is about vowel-vowel sequences across word boundaries in Québécois French (QF). QF has a number of phonological processes that seem motivated by hiatus avoidance, yet hiatus is tolerated in many instances as well. This research is about why hiatus is tolerated in QF, why it is avoided, and what grammatical models can account for the relevant processes.\nMy work is intended as a contribution to the study of how best to account for variation and opacity within current grammatical models, and as a contribution to the study of the QF vowel system. The data are drawn from a corpus constructed from recordings of web extras for a Québécois reality television series. The data primarily come from a single speaker to ensure that any variation in the data truly represents intra-grammar variation, but data from other speakers are used as safeguard. Through the use of quantitative data as a means of investigating problems in theoretical phonology, the thesis is also meant to contribute to methodological discussions and discussions about the relationship between phonetics and phonology.\nI propose that the patterns of hiatus and hiatus resolution in QF are best modeled through three sets of constraints organized in a serial manner. This proposal is based on the claims that the data show evidence for an anti-hiatus constraint, for feature-based analysis, for stochastic modeling, and for multiple levels.\nThe proposed model combines insights from Stochastic Optimality Theory (Boersma & Hayes 2001), multi-level Optimality Theory (Kiparsky 2000, 2010; Rubach 2000), and the Contrastivist Hypothesis (Dresher & Rice 2002, Dresher 2009, Hall 2007). Within the model, the first constraint set targets the smallest prosodic constituents and produces categorical outputs, the second applies to intermediate-sized constituents and can model optionality, and the third handles the largest prosodic constituents and produces complex patterns of variability.

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)0.007
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.936
Threshold uncertainty score0.127

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.002
Scholarly communication0.0030.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.003
GPT teacher head0.146
Teacher spread0.143 · 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 designObservational
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
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueLibrary and Archives Canada (Government of Canada)→Same topicAstrophysical Phenomena and Observations→French-language works237,207→