The typical development of simultaneous bilinguals
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This chapter focuses on the effect of the relative amount of exposure bilingual children have received in each of their languages on their performance on tests of language knowledge (vocabulary and grammar) and language processing (nonword repetition and sentence imitation). Results are reported on studies of two age groups of monolingual and bilingual preschoolers in Montreal, Canada, learning English and French. Amount of input exerted a strong effect on the rate of development of both vocabulary and grammar, but had little impact on children’s ability to repeat nonwords. Children with unequal amounts of exposure to each language had similarly unequal levels of performance both in vocabulary and grammar. Grammatical development followed strongly language specific patterns in terms of order of acquisition, accuracy and error types. Normative data are reported on bilingual children with different levels of exposure that aid in the language assessment of bilingual children. Nonword repetition accurately distinguished children with and without language impairment regardless of bilingual exposure.
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 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 | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.021 | 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 it