MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7067218038

La structure du prédicat verbal : une étude de la construction à double objet en français

2010· dissertation· en· W7067218038 on OpenAlexvenueno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueLibrary and Archives Canada (Government of Canada) · 2010
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicSyntax, Semantics, Linguistic Variation
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDative caseObject (grammar)SyntaxVariety (cybernetics)Argument (complex analysis)Construction grammarVerbPhilosophy of languageSemantics (computer science)
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The present thesis addresses the issue as to why the double object construction (e.g., John gave Mary a book) seems to appear in certain languages but not in others. This construction has received much attention in past research in formal linguistics and has played a central role in developing our understanding of the internal structure of the VP. Previous studies generally define the construction with respect to relative linear order of the object complements of the verb and the lack of morphological markings on these objects. We show that these properties are not inherent to the construction and that consequently, the construction exists in a wider variety of languages than previously assumed, particularly French. \nAlong the lines of Goldberg (1995, 2006), we develop a universal semantic definition of the construction, which may be used as a diagnostic to test, systematically and categorically, its presence across languages. In particular, we identify the double object construction in French as, for example, Jean a donné le livre à Marie. We then explain the cross-linguistic structural differences with a Case-driven approach. Specifically, we argue that the inherent dative Case, present in French but not in English, is responsible for the structural differences recognized between the languages. By adopting a minimalist derivation of argument structure (Chomsky 1995, 2000, 2004) and the applicative analysis (Pylkkänen 2002), we are able to determine the syntax of the construction, while eliminating the redundancies and limitations of previous accounts. We present certain resulting predictions related to the grammar, including a generalisation of Case-checking by the low applicative phrase, a syntactic position related to the direct object properties, and universal properties of the construction itself.\nIn all, this thesis offers empirical evidence for the universality of the double object construction and Case-driven syntactic derivation.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.025
Threshold uncertainty score0.049

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0030.007
Scholarly communication0.0050.004
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.001

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 head0.002
GPT teacher head0.157
Teacher spread0.155 · 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 designNot applicable
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
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueLibrary and Archives Canada (Government of Canada)Same topicSyntax, Semantics, Linguistic VariationFrench-language works237,207