Developmental changes in Arabic babbling in relation to English and French babbling
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Infant vocalization undergoes dramatic changes during the transition from newborn cooing and infant babbling toward the production of meaningful speech. However, the processes underlying these changes are not fully understood, particularly at the age at which ambient language input begins to influence infant babbling. The aim of this study was to describe the babbling produced by Arabic infants―using acoustic and phonetic metrics―and then examine the effects of linguistic environmental input on babbling by comparing the babble produced by Arabic infants to that produced by English and French infants. Speech samples were collected from infants learning Arabic (N = 31; age: 281-591 days), English (N = 20; age: 303-553 days) or French (N = 23; age: 311-566 days). Each utterance was transcribed according to the International Phonetic Alphabet and then coded according to infraphonological categories. Two studies were conducted. Study one aimed to describe the vowel space of Arabic infants and then compare it to the vowel space of English and French infants. First (F1) and second (F2) formant frequencies were identified in all vowels produced with full resonance, normal phonation, and speech-like duration. These F1 and F2 frequencies were used to calculate the compact-diffuse (F2 - F1) and grave-acute ([F2+F1]/2) values for each vowel so that the extreme corners of each infant's vowel space could be identified. Multiple regression and analysis of variance analyses were used to examine the effects of language and age on the infant vowel space (centre, corners, and area of the space). Developmental changes in the expansion of the vowel space toward the grave corner were observed in all language groups. In addition, a language-specific pattern of changes on the vowel space were observed with age: Arabic infants showed unchanged F1 and F2 values at the centre of the space, expansion toward the compact corner, a larger vowel space than infants in the other language groups at all ages studied; French infants showed a decreased F1 and unchanged F2 values at the centre, an expansion toward the diffuse corner, and a shrinking from the acute corner toward the center of the vowel space; and English infants showed decreased F2 values but unchanged F1 values at the centre of the vowel space. Study two aimed to describe the consonantal repertoires of Arabic infants and then compare these consonantal repertoires across three infant language groups. Infants were organized into three age groups (10-12, 12-15 and 15-18 months), and the consonants produced in canonical (CS) and marginal (MS) syllables with normal phonation were grouped into manner and place categories. Analysis of variance revealed no significant crosslinguistic differences in the frequency of production of any manner or place categories.This study showed developmental and language-specific changes in the infant vowel space when vowels were submitted to acoustic analysis. However, early crosslinguistic differences in vowel space were not accompanied by crosslinguistic differences in the consonantal repertoires based on phonetic transcription analyses. The overall findings from the current study provide evidence for the interactional hypothesis and suggest that the development of infant babbling is influenced by a complex interaction of endogenous and exogenous processes including biological development of the vocal tract and language input from the ambient environment.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".