ÉTude De la Contribution De la Mémoire De Travail et De la Mémoire Phonologique Dans la Réalisation D'une Tâche Métasyntaxique Chez Des Enfants De Langue D'origine
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Résumé L’habileté métasyntaxique, à savoir l’habileté à réfléchir sur les aspects syntaxiques de la langue et à en contrôler délibérément l’usage (Gombert, 1988), est importante pour le développement langagier aussi bien des enfants natifs que des enfants de langue d’origine. L’habileté métasyntaxique exige pour sa réalisation l’emmagasinage et le traitement délibéré de l’information verbale, impliquant théoriquement la capacité de mémoire de travail et la capacité de mémoire phonologique. Or, aucune étude n’a examiné la relation et la contribution de ces deux capacités à l’habileté métasyntaxique auprès des enfants de langue d’origine. Dans la présente étude, nous avons examiné cette relation auprès de 25 enfants de langue d’origine arabophone (âge moyen = 9 ans), scolarisés en français langue seconde. Quatre instruments ont été utilisés : une tâche de répétition de phrases asémantiques agrammaticales (asyntaxiques) pour mesurer l’habileté métasyntaxique, une tâche d’empan complexe numérique (Oakhill, Yuill et Garnham, 2011) pour mesurer la capacité de mémoire de travail, une tâche de reconnaissance de séries de non-mots comme mesure de la capacité de mémoire phonologique et une mesure des connaissances syntaxiques. Les résultats des régressions ont révélé une unique contribution de la capacité de mémoire de travail à l’habileté métasyntaxique, attestant de l’importance du contrôle attentionnel de la mémoire de travail dans l’habileté métasyntaxique chez des enfants de langue d’origine. Abstract Metasyntactic ability, which is the ability to reflect upon, and intentionally control and manipulate syntactic aspects of language (Gombert, 1988), is believed to play an important role in language skills development among native speakers and heritage language learners. Although a substantial amount of research has described the role of metasyntactic ability in written language development, little is known about the underlying cognitive processes supporting it. Metasyntactic ability requires storage, control and manipulation of information. Thus, it is thought to tap into memory capacities, namely phonological memory capacity and working memory capacity. While some studies have looked into the relationship between each of these memories and metasyntactic ability, none has examined the relationship and contribution of both to metasyntactic ability. In the present study, we investigated this among 25 heritage language speakers of Arabic, learners of French (mean age = 9 years), living in a French-speaking environment. Three measurement instruments were used: a repetition of French asemantic ungrammatical sentences measuring metasyntactic ability; a numerical complex span task to measure the working memory capacity (Oakhill, Yuill, & Garnham, 2011); and a non-word recognition task to measure phonological memory capacity. Results from the multiple regressions revealed a significant unique contribution of working memory capacity to metasyntactic ability, providing support for the importance of the control system for metasyntactic ability among heritage language learners.
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 | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".