Spontaneous measures of morphosyntax in children with specific language impairment
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Fifteen children with specific language impairment (SLI) were matched in gender, age, and nonverbal mental age to one comparison group and in gender and standardized expressive language age to another comparison group. Their spontaneous speech was recorded while they narrated a cartoon and described their classroom. No group differences were found in mean length of utterance in morphemes or in syntactic complexity. SLI children had a lower percentage of correct irregular past tense forms but were equivalent to controls on regular past tense forms and noun plurals. Lexical diversity in terms of the number of different verbs expressed in the past tense and the number of different nouns pluralized did not differ. Some problems in generating complex sentences were found in the speech of SLI children. The importance of task constraints is stressed in explaining the discrepant performance of SLI children on spontaneous versus standardized measures of language, as well as the contribution of auditory memory limitations.Editor's Note: This article was reviewed and accepted by the previous Editor in Chief, Dr. John Locke.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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".