MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7164841191 · doi:10.3765/yzkpcj50

The presuppositions of 'forget'

2025· article· W7164841191 on OpenAlexaff
Will Williams

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings from Semantics and Linguistic Theory · 2025
Typearticle
Language
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicSyntax, Semantics, Linguistic Variation
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPresuppositionCovertVerbArgument (complex analysis)ModalOperator (biology)Complement (music)Modal operator

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The propositional attitude verb forget has received relatively little attention in the formal linguistics literature, though its properties present interesting problems for formal semantics. White (2014) argues that a uniform account of forget as a factive verb is possible. On this view, forget presupposes the truth of its clausal argument (See also Kiparsky & Kiparsky (1970)). But in order to do so, he claims that a covert modal operator is obligatorily present in non-finite complements of forget, deriving modalized factive presuppositions. In this paper, I present data showing that the distribution of this covert modal operator is even more restricted. I argue that modalization of the complement is separate from the clause-type, and that it is instead the pre-existence presupposition (Bondarenko 2020), that is part of forget’s meaning, that is responsible for the distribution of this covert operator.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.009
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Meta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies, Scholarly communication
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.613
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0020.002
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.233
Teacher spread0.223 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designTheoretical or conceptual
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
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings from Semantics and Linguistic TheorySame topicSyntax, Semantics, Linguistic VariationFrench-language works237,207