MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2068275880 · doi:10.1121/1.1377287

Category restructuring during second-language speech acquisition

2001· article· en· W2068275880 on OpenAlexaffabout
I. Mackay, James Emil Flege, Thorsten Piske, Carlo Schirru

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of the Acoustical Society of America · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicPhonetics and Phonology Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
FundersNational Institute on Deafness and Other Communication Disorders
KeywordsNeuroscience of multilingualismPsychologyLinguisticsPerceptionAge of AcquisitionSecond languageFirst languageAudiologyCognitionMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study examined the production of English /b/ and the perception of short-lag English /b d g/ tokens by four groups of bilinguals who differed according to their age of arrival (AOA) in Canada from Italy and amount of self-reported native language (L1) use. A clear difference emerged between early bilinguals (mean AOA= 8 years) and late bilinguals (mean AOA= 20 years). The late bilinguals showed a stronger L1 influence than the early bilinguals did on both the production and perception of English stops. In experiment 2, the late bilinguals produced a larger percentage of prevoiced English /b/ tokens than early bilinguals and native English (NE) speakers did. In experiment 3, the late bilinguals misidentified short-lag English /b d g/ tokens as /p t k/ more often than the early bilinguals and NE speakers did. Experiment 4 revealed that the frequencies with which the bilinguals prevoiced /b d g/ in Italian and English were correlated. The observed differences between the early and late bilinguals were attributed to differences in the quantity and quality of English phonetic input they had received, not to a greater likelihood by the early than late bilinguals to establish new phonetic categories for English /b d g/.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.003
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 science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.307
Teacher spread0.292 · 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

Citations150
Published2001
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of the Acoustical Society of AmericaSame topicPhonetics and Phonology ResearchFrench-language works237,207