MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2040405927 · doi:10.1159/000082557

Release Bursts in English Word-Final Voiceless Stops Produced by Native English and Korean Adults and Children

2005· article· en· W2040405927 on OpenAlexaff
Kimiko Tsukada, David Birdsong, Molly Mack, Hyekyung Sung, Ellen Bialystok, James Emil Flege

Bibliographic record

VenuePhonetica · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicPhonetics and Phonology Research
Canadian institutionsYork University
FundersNational Institutes of HealthNational Institute on Deafness and Other Communication DisordersKorea UniversityUniversity of Alabama at Birmingham
KeywordsLinguisticsWord (group theory)PsychologyAudiologyCommunicationSpeech recognitionHistoryComputer scienceMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The aim of this study was to evaluate the acquisition of statistical properties of a second language (L2). Stop consonants are permitted in word-final position in both English and Korean, but they are variably released in English and invariably unreleased in Korean. Native Korean (K) adults and children living in North America and age-matched native English (E) speakers repeated English words ending in released tokens of /t/ and /k/ at two times separated by 1.2 years. The judgments of E-speaking listeners were used to determine if the stimuli were repeated with audible release bursts. Experiments 1 and 2 revealed fewer final releases for K than E adults, and fewer releases for /t/ (but not /k/) for K than E children. Nearly all /t/ and /k/ tokens were heard as intended in experiment 3, which evaluated intelligibility. However, the K adults' /k/ tokens were identified with less certainty than the E adults'. Taken together, the results suggested that noncontrastive (i.e., statistical) properties of an L2 can be learned by children, and to a somewhat lesser extent by adults.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.284
Teacher spread0.271 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
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

Citations46
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePhoneticaSame topicPhonetics and Phonology ResearchFrench-language works237,207