The Evolution of Iranian French Learners’ Spoken Interlanguage from a Cognitive Point of View
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper analyzes the spoken corpus of thirty Iranian learners of French at four levels (A1, A2, B1 and B2). The data were collected in a pseudo-longitudinal manner in semi-directed interviews with half closed and open questions to analyze the learners’ syntactic errors (omission, addition, substitution and displacement). The most frequent errors from A1 to B2 levels were determined and categorized, which allowed further analysis. The results show although some persistent errors are problematic at all levels, their form changes from one level to another. At A1 and A2 levels, the definite articles were missed before nouns, at B1 and B2, they were set aside in the second word of noun groups. In addition, at A1 and A2 levels errors are more of an interlingual nature while at B1 and B2 levels they are mostly intralingual. At elementary levels, learners deal with proactive transfers whereas in more advanced levels retroactive transfers and overextensions come into play.
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 | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| 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".