La conscience phonologique des enfants bilingues français-anglais pré-lecteurs : une étude comparative France-Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Résumé Basée sur les travaux qui mettent en évidence une conscience phonologique plus précoce chez les enfants bilingues pré-lecteurs, la présente étude porte sur deux populations bilingues parlant les mêmes langues, mais appartenant à des contextes sociolinguistiques différents. Son objectif est de déterminer, d’une part, si ces enfants possèdent une conscience phonologique similaire avant l’apprentissage formel de la lecture et de l’écriture comparativement à un groupe d’enfants monolingues, et, d’autre part, de quelle manière les caractéristiques phonologiques de chaque langue influencent la segmentation du discours. Pour ce faire, deux tâches de conscience phonologique ont été proposées. Par rapport à leurs pairs monolingues, les enfants bilingues n’obtiennent pas de meilleurs résultats aux tâches en question. Cependant, ils réalisent des découpages phonologiques spécifiques et particulièrement intéressants. Ces résultats sont discutés, à la fois, par rapport aux spécificités phonologiques de chaque langue et relativement à l’impact de la langue de la communauté sur le développement de la conscience phonologique. Abstract This study compares two groups of French-English bilingual pre-readers, one in France and one in Canada, on phonological awareness. The goal is to investigate whether, in comparison to monolinguals, bilingual children have the same type of phonological awareness before formal instruction and how linguistic features of the two languages affect speech segmentation. Both groups of bilinguals, as well as French and English monolinguals, were recruited and two well-known phonological awareness tasks were used. The data reveal that bilinguals do not outperform their monolingual peers. However, they adopt a specific and interesting way to segment the items. The results are discussed in the framework of both phonological features of the languages and effects of the language of the community on phonological awareness development.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".