Knowledge of Adjective Reference by Monolingual Spanish- and English-Speaking Children
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Previous studies (Waxman, Senghas and Benveniste, 1997 and Waxman and Guasti 2009) have concluded that there are crosslinguistic differences in the interpretation of adjectives by English, French, Spanish and Italian- monolingual speaking children. Their results show that only Spanish and Italian-speaking children categorized a novel adjective as an object responding in the same way for the categorization of a noun. According to the authors this is due to the Determiner-Adjective syntactic constructions in these languages that refer to the named objects or entities and to other members of that object category (e.g. los pobres). The present study looks more precisely at the interpretation of adjectives by presenting a task in which children had to recognize adjectives as properties of objects and it explores the role of syntax and morphology as informative linguistic sources for their acquisition by using four different linguistic contexts. The results show that English- and Spanish- monolingual speaking children do understand that adjectives refer to properties and not to objects responding in a different way for a categorization of an adjective. Estudios anteriores (Waxman, Senghas and Benveniste, 1997 and Waxman and Guasti 2009) han concluido que existen diferencias croslingüísticas en la interpretación de los adjetivos por parte de los niños monolingües que hablan inglés, francés, español e italiano. Sus resultados muestran que solamente los niños que hablan español e italiano categorizan un adjetivo nuevo como un objeto respondiendo igual que a la categorización de un sustantivo. Los autores explican que esto se debe a las construcciones sintácticas de Articulo-Adjetivo en las lenguas mencionadas que se refieren a los objetos o entidades nombrados y a otros miembros de la categoría del objeto, por ejemplo: los pobres. El presente estudio analiza más precisamente la interpretación de los adjetivos presentando una tarea en el que el niño tiene que reconocer a los adjetivos como propiedades de objetos y explora el papel de la sintaxis y la morfología como recursos informativos lingüísticos para la adquisición de los adjetivos utilizando cuatro diferentes contextos lingüísticos. Los resultados muestran que los niños hablantes monolingües de inglés y español entienden que los adjetivos se refieren a las propiedades y no a los objetos respondiendo en forma diferente sobre la categorización de un adjetivo.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".