Verb argument structure weakness in specific language impairment in relation to age and utterance length
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In spite of the complexity of verb argument structure, argument structure errors are infrequent in the speech of children with specific language impairment (SLI). The study examined the spontaneous argument structure use of school-age children with SLI and with normal language (NL) (n = 100). The groups did not differ substantially in frequency of argument structure errors, particularly when pragmatic context was considered. However, children with SLI used significantly fewer argument types, argument structure types and verb alternations than age-matched children with NL. Further, significant differences between children with SLI and mean length of utterance-matched controls were found involving the use of three-place argument structures. The results show that children with SLI demonstrate mostly correct, but less sophisticated, verb argument structure use than NL peers, and that the difference is not merely attributable to production limitations such as utterance length. The possibility of incomplete argument structure representation is suggested.
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.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 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) | 0.001 | 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 it