MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W7162016406 · doi:10.82308/20551

Language development in internationally-adopted children acquiring French as a "second first language"

2010· dissertation· en· W7162016406 sur OpenAlexaboutno aff
Karine Gauthier

Notice bibliographique

Revuenon disponible
Typedissertation
Langueen
DomaineSocial Sciences
ThématiqueChild Welfare and Adoption
Établissements canadiensnon disponible
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésLanguage developmentLanguage acquisitionAffect (linguistics)Longitudinal studyContrast (vision)Child development

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

Investigating the development of internationally-adopted (IA) children makes it possible to examine how early life experiences might affect later development and, in particular, the extent to which the language faculty is flexible and can adapt to a new language after interruption in acquisition of the birth language. The general purpose of the present research program was to study the ability of IA children to acquire their "second first language" and to identify factors that might favor or impede the development of their new language, French in the case of the studies presented in this thesis. In contrast with other studies, except for Cohen, Lojkasek, Zadeh, Pugliese and Kiefer (2008), variables that have been shown to have an impact on language development, namely familial socio-economic status, and sex, were carefully controlled in the present studies. To our knowledge, these are the first studies to examine the acquisition of French in IA children. Study 1 is a longitudinal study in which the language skills, non-verbal intelligence, socio-emotional adjustment, and general health of Chinese-born children adopted into Canadian French-speaking families were compared to those of matched non-adopted monolingual French-speaking children. The children were assessed a first time at 4 years of age, on average, and again 16 months later. They had been in their adoptive families for 3 and 4 years, on average, respectively. The results of the initial assessment showed that the two groups did not differ with respect to socio-emotional adjustment or non-verbal intelligence. Moreover, the IA children performed in the average range on most language tests when compared to test norms, suggesting resiliency in their language acquisition abilities. However, an important percentage of IA children performed significantly below the norms on the Recalling Sentences subtest of the Clinical Evaluation of Language Fundamentals-Revised. Also, as a group, the IA children performed significantly lower than their non-adopted peers particularly on expressive language tests (lexical and grammatical). To better characterize the language abilities of the IA children, spontaneous language samples of a subgroup of the IA children from Study 1 were analyzed in detail in Study 2. Results of Study 2 indicated that the IA children had a remarkable capacity to catch-up to their non-adopted peers with respect to diverse features of language, such as mean length of utterance, lexical diversity, and tense morphology; but, they made significantly more errors with complement clitics. Study 3 was undertaken in order to examine IA children's very early communicative and language development and the nature of adoptive mothers' language input and attention regulation strategies with their adoptive children soon after adoption. The results support the conclusion that adoptive mothers play an active role in promoting and maintaining joint attention with their adopted children and that the interaction strategy they use most, redirecting their child's attentional focus, contrasts with what has been shown to be effective for biological children raised in Western cultures (Baldwin, 1991; Tomasello & Farrar, 1986) but was, nevertheless positively associated with the internationally-adopted children's later lexical development. Overall, the findings suggest that IA children exhibited accelerated development in diverse domains of their second first language; but, however, there were significant differences in specific aspects of their language development in comparison to matched control children that suggest the possibility of very early age of acquisition effects.

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier

Prédiction machine sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,001
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesaucune
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Observationnel · Signal consensuel: Observationnel
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: Empirique
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,105
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,210

Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0010,002
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0010,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0000,001
Bibliométrie0,0010,001
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0010,001
Communication savante0,0010,000
Science ouverte0,0000,001
Intégrité de la recherche0,0000,001
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0010,000

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,006
Tête enseignante GPT0,283
Écart entre enseignants0,277 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.

Les modèles n’ont appliqué aucune catégorie : rien dans la taxonomie ne correspondait à ce travail.
Devis d'étudeObservationnel
Domainenon disponible
GenreEmpirique

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations0
Publié2010
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même sujetChild Welfare and AdoptionTravaux en français237 207