Documentation

Studies.Hafeez2025

Hafeez (2025): Agentivity and causation in Urdu #

[Haf25] asks which Urdu causal constructions speakers accept for which causal scenes. The scenes are the 43 video clips of the Causality Across Languages project, and they vary along three variables: the causer is an intentional human (IHCr), an accidental human (AHCr) or a natural force (NFCr); the second participant of the chain is a controlling human causee (ContrHCEAF), a physically or a psychologically impacted human (PhysImpHCEAF, PsychImpHCEAF) or an inanimate affectee (InanCEAF); and a third participant does or does not mediate the chain (Mediation).

The acceptability study (chapter 5) had twelve raters judge a description of every clip in each of seven response types, and fits one conditional inference tree per response type. Each leaf of a tree is a conjunction of signed predictors such as [+IHCr, -Mediation, +InanCEAF], and the leaf with the highest share of ceiling ratings is the response type's hypothesized semantic prototype when that share exceeds 50% (Table 18). The response types are the lexical ergative LEX-ERG (ergative causer, transitive verb), the lexical instrumental LEX-INST (instrumental causer, intransitive verb), the lexical dative LEX-DAT (dative causee or affectee, infinitive and light verb), the morphological causative verb MCV (the indirect causative -va; verbs with the direct causative -aa count as lexical), the adverbial ADV (two clauses joined by keyoonkeh 'because'), the non-sentential cause adjunct NCA (a cause NP with =par, wajhan=se or =se) and the non-sentential causer adjunct NCrA (a causer NP with wajhan=se). The printed tables are Data/Experiments/Hafeez2025.

Implementation notes #

The second participant is one variable with four values, so a scene type such as [-ContrHCEAF, +InanCEAF] and its shorter form [+InanCEAF] are equivalent, which is how Table 18's LEX-INST leaf and the LEX-INST prototype of Tables 19 and 25 agree. The scene's mediation is the substrate's Causation.Morphological.Mediation: [+Mediation] is a third participant between causer and result, the narrow sense of directness the dissertation distinguishes from the broad one.

References #

Scenes #

The causer of a scene.

  • intentionalHuman : Causer

    IHCr: acts intentionally and in control.

  • accidentalHuman : Causer

    AHCr: acts accidentally, without intention or control.

  • naturalForce : Causer

    NFCr: a natural force.

Instances For
    @[instance_reducible]
    Equations
    @[instance_reducible]
    Equations
    def Hafeez2025.instReprCauser.repr :
    Causer → ℕ → Std.Format
    Equations
    • One or more equations did not get rendered due to their size.
    Instances For

      The second participant of the causal chain: a causee when it is an induced agent, an affectee when it is a patient.

      • controlling : CauseeAffectee

        ContrHCEAF: a human who controls the induced action.

      • physicallyImpacted : CauseeAffectee

        PhysImpHCEAF: a human impacted physically.

      • psychologicallyImpacted : CauseeAffectee

        PsychImpHCEAF: a human impacted psychologically.

      • inanimate : CauseeAffectee

        InanCEAF: an inanimate affectee.

      Instances For
        @[instance_reducible]
        Equations
        Equations
        • One or more equations did not get rendered due to their size.
        Instances For
          @[instance_reducible]
          Equations
          • One or more equations did not get rendered due to their size.

          A causal scene: its causer, its second participant, and whether a third participant mediates the chain.

          Instances For
            def Hafeez2025.instDecidableEqScene.decEq (x✝ x✝¹ : Scene) :
            Decidable (x✝ = x✝¹)
            Equations
            • One or more equations did not get rendered due to their size.
            Instances For
              def Hafeez2025.instReprScene.repr :
              Scene → ℕ → Std.Format
              Equations
              • One or more equations did not get rendered due to their size.
              Instances For
                @[instance_reducible]
                Equations

                A scene the design can stage: a mediated chain's second participant is a human causee, never an inanimate affectee.

                Equations
                Instances For
                  @[instance_reducible]
                  Equations
                  • One or more equations did not get rendered due to their size.

                  Predictors and scene types #

                  @[instance_reducible]
                  instance Hafeez2025.instDecidablePredPredictorIs (s : Scene) :
                  DecidablePred s.Is
                  Equations
                  • One or more equations did not get rendered due to their size.

                  The scenes a signed predictor, [+F] or [-F], is true of.

                  Equations
                  Instances For
                    @[simp]

                    A scene falls under a scene type, a conjunction of signed predictors, when it has each.

                    Equations
                    Instances For
                      @[instance_reducible]
                      Equations
                      @[simp]
                      @[simp]
                      theorem Hafeez2025.Scene.fits_cons (s : Scene) (l : Predictor × Data.Experiments.Sign) (t : List (Predictor × Data.Experiments.Sign)) :
                      s.Fits (l :: t) ↔ s.Has l ∧ s.Fits t

                      The clips #

                      A clip's scene, read off its name by the code of Appendix L: the first letter is the causer, the second the second participant, and a third letter O an inanimate affectee behind a mediating causee. The code's one exception is clip 22, whose M marks an umbrella.

                      Equations
                      • One or more equations did not get rendered due to their size.
                      Instances For

                        Every clip is a scene the design can stage.

                        theorem Hafeez2025.table4_disagreements :
                        List.map (fun (x : Clip) => x.number) (List.filter (fun (c : Clip) => decide ¬∀ (p : Predictor), p ∈ c.present ↔ c.scene.Is p) clips) = [1, 11, 21, 22, 23]

                        The predictor table as printed (Table 4) disagrees with the clip names on five clips: it codes clips 11 and 21, where a pushed or bumped man knocks down a cup tower, with an inanimate second participant, the umbrella of clip 22 without one, and adds a human impact to the paper of clips 1 and 23.

                        Conditional inference trees #

                        A binary conditional inference tree: an inner node tests a signed predictor, sending the scenes that pass it left.

                        Instances For

                          The number of nodes.

                          Equations
                          Instances For
                            def Hafeez2025.Tree.leaves :
                            Tree → ℕ → List (ℕ × List (Predictor × Data.Experiments.Sign))

                            The leaves of a tree whose root is node n, numbered in preorder as the dissertation's tree plots number them, each with the scene type of its path.

                            Equations
                            Instances For
                              theorem Hafeez2025.Tree.countP_leaves (t : Tree) (n : ℕ) (s : Scene) :
                              List.countP (fun (p : ℕ × List (Predictor × Data.Experiments.Sign)) => decide (s.Fits p.2)) (t.leaves n) = 1

                              The leaves of a tree partition the scenes: each scene falls under exactly one leaf.

                              The scene type of a leaf of Table 18, with the InanCEAF signs of the ADV tree as section 5.3.5 states them.

                              Equations
                              • One or more equations did not get rendered due to their size.
                              Instances For

                                The leaves of a response type's tree in Table 18.

                                Equations
                                Instances For

                                  The tree of a response type of the acceptability study.

                                  Equations
                                  • One or more equations did not get rendered due to their size.
                                  • Hafeez2025.tree x✝ = none
                                  Instances For
                                    theorem Hafeez2025.tree_leaves (r : ResponseType) (t : Tree) (h : tree r = some t) :
                                    t.leaves 1 = List.map (fun (l : Leaf) => (l.node, leafPath l)) (leavesOf r)

                                    The trees reproduce Table 18: their leaves, numbered in preorder, are the printed leaves.

                                    theorem Hafeez2025.leaves_partition (r : ResponseType) (t : Tree) (h : tree r = some t) (s : Scene) :
                                    List.countP (fun (l : Leaf) => decide (s.Fits (leafPath l))) (leavesOf r) = 1

                                    Each tree's leaves in Table 18 partition the scenes.

                                    Response counts #

                                    The number of clips whose scene falls under a scene type.

                                    Equations
                                    Instances For

                                      Under the clip names, no leaf holds more responses than the twelve raters give its clips.

                                      theorem Hafeez2025.responses_shortfall :
                                      List.map (fun (l : Leaf) => (l.responseType, l.node)) (List.filter (fun (l : Leaf) => decide (l.responses ≠ raters * clipCount (leafPath l))) leaves) = [(ResponseType.lexInst, 8), (ResponseType.lexDat, 5), (ResponseType.ncrA, 7)]

                                      Every leaf holds exactly the responses of its clips but three, which fall short.

                                      With the InanCEAF signs Table 18 prints, no ADV leaf holds the responses of its clips.

                                      Whether Table 4 marks a clip with a signed predictor.

                                      Equations
                                      Instances For
                                        @[instance_reducible]
                                        Equations
                                        theorem Hafeez2025.table4_exceeded :
                                        List.map (fun (l : Leaf) => (l.responseType, l.node)) (List.filter (fun (l : Leaf) => decide (raters * List.countP (fun (c : Clip) => decide (∀ q ∈ leafPath l, table4Has c q)) clips < l.responses)) leaves) = [(ResponseType.lexInst, 4), (ResponseType.adv, 5), (ResponseType.nca, 3)]

                                        Under the coding of Table 4 as printed, three leaves hold more responses than the twelve raters could give their clips, so Table 4 is not the coding the trees were fit on.

                                        Every printed percentage is some count of the leaf's responses, rounded, except the 0.08 of the LEX-INST tree, which no count out of 252 rounds to.

                                        Prototypes #

                                        The leaf with the peak share of ceiling ratings.

                                        Equations
                                        Instances For

                                          The hypothesized semantic prototype: the scene type of the peak leaf, when its share of ceiling ratings exceeds 50%.

                                          Equations
                                          Instances For

                                            The scenes of the response type's prototype.

                                            Equations
                                            Instances For
                                              @[instance_reducible]
                                              Equations

                                              LEX-DAT, whose peak is 41.7%, has no prototype; the response types the acceptability study did not test have none either.

                                              theorem Hafeez2025.exists_clip_prototypical (r : ResponseType) (hr : prototype r ≠ none) :
                                              ∃ c ∈ clips, Prototypical r c.scene

                                              Every prototype holds of a clip, so the statements about prototypical scenes below are not vacuous.

                                              theorem Hafeez2025.summary_percent (row : SummaryRow) :
                                              row ∈ summary → row.responseType ≠ ResponseType.nca → row.responseType ≠ ResponseType.ncrA → some row.percent = Option.map (fun (x : Leaf) => x.ceilingPercent) (peakLeaf row.responseType)

                                              Table 19 prints each response type's peak, except that it swaps those of NCA and NCrA.

                                              theorem Hafeez2025.summary_percent_swapped (row : SummaryRow) :
                                              row ∈ summary → (row.responseType = ResponseType.nca → some row.percent = Option.map (fun (x : Leaf) => x.ceilingPercent) (peakLeaf ResponseType.ncrA)) ∧ (row.responseType = ResponseType.ncrA → some row.percent = Option.map (fun (x : Leaf) => x.ceilingPercent) (peakLeaf ResponseType.nca))
                                              theorem Hafeez2025.summary_prototype_eq (row : SummaryRow) :
                                              row ∈ summary → ∃ c ∈ comparison, c.responseType = row.responseType ∧ c.prototype = row.prototype

                                              Tables 19 and 25 print the same prototypes.

                                              theorem Hafeez2025.summary_iff_prototype (row : ComparisonRow) :
                                              row ∈ comparison → row.responseType ≠ ResponseType.adv → ∀ (s : Scene), s.Stageable → ((∃ t ∈ row.prototype, s.Fits t) ↔ Prototypical row.responseType s)

                                              The printed prototypes denote the derived ones on the scenes the design can stage, ADV's excepted.

                                              Apart from LEX-ERG's and ADV's, the printed prototypes denote the derived ones on every scene.

                                              LEX-ERG's printed prototype [+IHCr, +InanCEAF] drops its leaf's [-Mediation]: it also holds of a mediated scene with an inanimate second participant, which the design never stages.

                                              ADV's printed prototype [+InanCEAF] is the complement of the derived one.

                                              Agentivity #

                                              The degrees of agentivity, from intentionality and control, the ability to initiate or terminate an action in [Boh04]'s sense: full for an intentional actor in control, marginal for an actor involved accidentally, without intention or control, and induced for a causee in control of an action it was induced to perform.

                                              Instances For
                                                @[instance_reducible]
                                                Equations
                                                def Hafeez2025.instReprDegree.repr :
                                                Degree → ℕ → Std.Format
                                                Equations
                                                Instances For
                                                  @[instance_reducible]
                                                  Equations

                                                  LEX-ERG expresses the highest degree of agentivity: an intentional causer.

                                                  LEX-INST expresses marginal agentivity or none.

                                                  MCV is causation by communication: an intentional causer and a causee in control.

                                                  ADV wants an agentive second participant, partially or marginally.

                                                  NCA wants an agentive causer, fully or marginally, and an agentive second participant, partially or marginally.

                                                  NCrA wants a non-agentive causer and an agentive second participant.

                                                  Production #

                                                  theorem Hafeez2025.individual_le_prototype (row : ComparisonRow) :
                                                  row ∈ comparison → row.rated = Answer.yes → ∀ t ∈ row.individualPreferences, ∀ (s : Scene), s.Stageable → s.Fits t → Prototypical row.responseType s

                                                  The production study's preferences refine the acceptability prototypes: every stageable scene a rated response type's own model prefers it for is prototypical for it.

                                                  The model of all response types prefers NCA for a psychologically impacted second participant, and the clip of a woman startled by thunder is such a scene outside the NCA prototype.

                                                  Compactness and directness #

                                                  The LEX-ERG prototype is unmediated and the MCV prototype mediated.

                                                  The lexical LEX-ERG and the morphological MCV, located by the mediation of their prototypes, satisfy [Com89]'s monotonicity strictly.