Phonetic vs. Phonological Considerations in Inter-Generational Vowel Change in Toronto Heritage Cantonese
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Chang et al. (2011) have shown that phonological considerations may override phonetic similarity in influencing the phonetic production of /u/ and /y/ among heritage Mandarin speakers. This study addresses whether or not this generalization holds for another heritage language with a similar contrast corresponding to one vowel category, /u/, in the dominant language (English) by comparing vowel production among GEN 1 (L1 Cantonese) and GEN 2 (English-Cantonese early bilinguals) speakers. The mean F1 and F2 of 30 vowel tokens of /u/ and /y/ from each of 17 speakers from the HerLD (Heritage Language Documentation) Corpus (Nagy 2011) were measured (N=510). Results show maintenance of the Cantonese /y/ ~ /u/ contrast and lack of assimilation of Cantonese /u/ to the relatively high F2 of Toronto English /u/. These results support Chang et al’s (2011) claim that early bilingualism favors maintenance of cross-linguistic and language internal phonological distinctions in both languages.
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 | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.014 | 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".