Asynchronous language acquisition in developmental dysphasia.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A longitudinal study was conducted to document and compare evolution of children with linguistic acquisition impairment. To determine whether development of the analytic mechanisms underlying linguistic processing occured in similar fashion, two children with mixed developmental dysphasia were assessed from 4 to 5:6 years of age with psycholinguistic tests at 6-months interval. Spontaneous speech and language production (consonant repertory in initial word position, MLU, and lexical diversity) were investigated in a standardized symbolic play context. The phonologic and lexico-morphologic evolution analyses revealed a marked improvement in motor control of phonology and in the application of morphosyntaxic rules in child 1, whereas child 2 was still impaired in phonology and morphosyntax. The singular developmental changes in spontaneous speech results indicate dynamic relationships between various language production facets and variability in the kind of deficit and lexical automation presented by these children. These contrasts in the evolution of language production profiles between child 1 and child 2 also underline the importance of longitudinal studies in the analysis of the atypical linguistic processing paths used by children with developmental dysphasia.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 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".