Bibliographic record
Abstract
Pragmatic abilities are language skills which we use in concrete circumstances or context when we talk or interact with other people. These abilities are taking initiative to speak, response on this initiative, speaking itself, use of gestures, moves, understanding of speech. Pragmatic language development takes very important part in development of speech, language and communication. \nIn this study we analysed pragmatic abilities in preschool children from 18 to 47 months of age. This study shows age and gender differences in pragmatic abilities between children. \nPragmatic abilities were tested with questionnaire called Language use inventory – LUI (O'Neill, 2009) which assesses pragmatic language development in children from 18 to 47 months of age. At the Faculty of Education we translated the questionnaire and this is the first adaptation of the questionnaire into slovenian language. The author of the questionnaire is Daniela K. O'Neill, canadian psychologist, professor of developmental psychology. Her research has focused on the interplay between children’s developing understanding of mind and their communicative development. \nThe questionnaire is quite extensive, for this reason the sample was small, it included 44 children from central Slovenia. It was taken by child's parents. The sample was purposive, because it included children 18 to 47 months of age. \nIn the theoretic part of our study we described pragmatics, speech and language development, which includes pragmatic development and pragmatic disorders. In the empiric part of our study the results showed that girls got better scores than boys, but there were no significant differences. The group of children who were older (31-47 months of age) were better in pragmatic abilities than the group of younger children (18-30 months of age). \nWith this study we adapted the questionnaire LUI – Language use inventory for Slovenian popoulation and acquired data about pragmatic development in preschool children. This questionnaire certainly is an important contribution for evaluating pragmatic abilities in children. \n
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.001 |
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.
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".