MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2496108897 · doi:10.1075/slcs.175.10nak

Acquisition of morphophonemic alternations and the role of frequency

2016· book-chapter· en· W2496108897 on OpenAlexaff
Mine Nakipoğlu-Demiralp, Reyhan Furman

Bibliographic record

VenueStudies in language companion series · 2016
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicPhonetics and Phonology Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAlternation (linguistics)MorphophonologyTurkishSpeech recognitionPsychologyComputer scienceLinguisticsPhonologyPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Bringing in acquisition data from stems that undergo morphophonemic alternation in Turkish, this study seeks to show how children’s acquisition path, mostly shaped by frequency implicates rules rather than a nondecomposed route. In Turkish most stems ending in the non-velar plosives [p], [t], [tʃ] undergo voicing alternation and stems ending in the velar plosive undergo deletion. On the grounds that the presence of non-velar-ending stems that do not undergo alternation or velar-ending stems that do not exhibit deletion may obscure the extraction of a pattern and give rise to errors in acquisition, we have tested 60 children in three developmental groups. We have found that children in all age groups erred and each sound type exhibited a variant error-path that reveals an interplay between type-frequency and token-frequency.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.033
GPT teacher head0.354
Teacher spread0.321 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueStudies in language companion seriesSame topicPhonetics and Phonology ResearchFrench-language works237,207