Most German Speakers Ignore the Cue That Best Predicts Plural Class
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Researchers generally assume that speakers use the linguistic information available to them. For instance, if one grammatical category robustly predicts another grammatical category, we expect speakers to reproduce this conditional relationship during language production. Here, we investigate this assumption for grammatical gender in German. Gender is the single cue which most strongly predicts the plural class of existing German nouns, but behavioral studies with novel nouns have found mixed results regarding the role of gender in plural generalization. Across three experiments, we examine how individual German speakers use grammatical gender when producing plural forms of novel nouns. We find that most speakers effectively ignore gender during plural class production, even under experimental manipulations that encourage them to attend to this cue. These results point toward an underexplored direction in cognitive science: accounting for the linguistic information that speakers do not use.
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.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.012 | 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 it