There are broad disagreements between existing models regarding the mental representations and processes involved in the "DEGREE ADVERB + PROPER NAME" construction, including disagreements regarding the semantics of the degree device, the category status of the proper name, the construction’s expressed meaning and its (non-)compositionality, and, crucially, the operation that holds between the degree device and the proper name. Our corpus-based investigation into two competing models from Construction Grammar and Formal Semantics shows that these models collectively make useful contributions to the scientific understanding of this construction, but neither is empirically adequate. Most importantly, we find that the construction participates in several non-predicted expressed meanings; multivariate analyses show that the three amenable to statistical analysis cluster with different semantic usage-features. We argue that the best way to account for the construction’s semantics-pragmatics is via a previously-dismissed cognitive mechanism: an enrichment-/strengthening-type operation whereby a pragmatically-supplied scale is added to the message.
This protocol contains descriptions of the constructional and semantico-pragmatic variables assessed while annotating the “very New York” dataset in our 2022 paper published in the journal Signifiances. It should be noted that many of these variables were not considered in the article owing to either time-constraints, space-constraints or because the variable was ultimately discarded.
Recent empirical studies have highlighted the large degree of analytic flexibility in data analysis that can lead to substantially different conclusions based on the same data set. Thus, researchers have expressed their concerns that these researcher degrees of freedom might facilitate bias and can lead to claims that do not stand the test of time. Even greater flexibility is to be expected in fields in which the primary data lend themselves to a variety of possible operationalizations. The multidimensional, temporally extended nature of speech constitutes an ideal testing ground for assessing the variability in analytic approaches, which derives not only from aspects of statistical modeling but also from decisions regarding the quantification of the measured behavior. In this study, we gave the same speech-production data set to 46 teams of researchers and asked them to answer the same research question, resulting in substantial variability in reported effect sizes and their interpretation. Using Bayesian meta-analytic tools, we further found little to no evidence that the observed variability can be explained by analysts’ prior beliefs, expertise, or the perceived quality of their analyses. In light of this idiosyncratic variability, we recommend that researchers more transparently share details of their analysis, strengthen the link between theoretical construct and quantitative system, and calibrate their (un)certainty in their conclusions.
Graduate student writing is finally receiving substantial scholarly attention, but little is known about the characteristics of the unstructured graduate student conference abstract (GSCA). This study seeks to characterize the rhetorical structures of GSCAs, as a basis for identifying potential writing support strategies. 107 French-language GSCAs from language-related fields (e.g., linguistics, second-language teaching) were coded using Hyland’s rhetorical moves (RMs) (Background-Aims-Methods-Results-Conclusion), yielding measures for RM frequency, RM sequencing, and RM recycling. We then use these measures to identify GSCAs that pattern together, via K-Means clustering. We find that the GSCAs studied pattern into three subtypes, two of which (72%) exhibit informational and/or structural shortcomings, most notably (1) missing RMs, (2) cognitively difficult RM sequences, and (3) unbalanced word-to-RM allotment. This study thus confirms that there is a need to implement strategies (e.g., conference submission guidelines) to better support graduate students in mastering this academic genre’s normative content and structure.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.