MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1528962743

RESETTING THE FUNCTIONAL FEATURES OF THE ACCUSATIVE CLITIC IN THE SECOND LANGUAGE ACQUISITION OF SPANISH

2014· article· en· W1528962743 on OpenAlexaff
Ungureanu Mona-Luiza

Bibliographic record

VenuePapers from the Annual Meetings of the Atlantic Provinces Linguistic Association (PAMAPLA) · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicSecond Language Acquisition and Learning
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Moncton
Fundersnot available
KeywordsInterlanguageCliticLinguisticsComputer scienceSecond-language acquisitionGrammarFirst languageSecond languageNatural language processingArtificial intelligence
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper contributes supporting evidence for the Full Access Hypothesis of second language acquisition, as proposed by White (1985b, 1986, 2000, 2003) and Duffield et al. (1999, 2002), among others, according to which adult second language learners have access to principles and parameters of Universal Grammar (UG) and can thus acquire the features of syntactic functional categories present in the second language. Here, we present the results and constitution of a small pilot study that investigates the ultimate attainment of functional features related to accusative clitic doubling agreement in the second language acquisition of Spanish by native speakers of Romanian. The aim is to determine whether the final state interlanguage language competence of the functional features under discussion complies with the grammar of (1) the second language (language to be acquired), (2) the first language of the learner, or (3) neither the rules of the first language nor those of the second language. We show that the features of the accusative clitic functional category are reset to the values of the L2 in a configuration in which the set of features of the L1 is restricted to those of the L2.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.011
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.508
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.011
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.249
Teacher spread0.243 · 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 designObservational
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
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePapers from the Annual Meetings of the Atlantic Provinces Linguistic Association (PAMAPLA)Same topicSecond Language Acquisition and LearningFrench-language works237,207