MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2536850608 · doi:10.1075/gs.4.19zva

Chapter 16. A cross-linguistic study of verbal and gestural descriptions in French and Japanese monolingual and bilingual children

2011· book-chapter· en· W2536850608 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueGesture studies · 2011
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicHearing Impairment and Communication
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGestureLinguisticsMotion (physics)PsychologyObject (grammar)Nonverbal communicationCommunicationCognitive psychologyComputer scienceArtificial intelligencePhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study investigated whether the presence of mimetics (sound-symbolic words) in language influences children’s verbal and gestural descriptions by comparing monolingual and bilingual speakers of Japanese and French. Mimetics are present in Japanese, but not French (Kita, 2008). 4 to 6-year-old children described motion and object characteristics to an experimenter during a referential communication task. Verbal descriptions were coded as precise or imprecise and produced with or without mimetics and/or iconic gestures. Mimetics and gestures were used frequently in Japanese, particularly for motion descriptions. Bilinguals patterned like monolinguals, except when speaking Japanese they used more imprecise descriptions and fewer mimetics. This shows that presence of mimetics in language and frequent exposure to them promotes their use in conjunction with gestures.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.483
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.074
GPT teacher head0.352
Teacher spread0.278 · 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