MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2759822266 · doi:10.5539/ijel.v7n6p164

Chinese ELF Learners’ Acquisition of Modal Verbs: A Corpus-Based Study

2017· article· en· W2759822266 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Yan Xiao

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of English Linguistics · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicSecond Language Acquisition and Learning
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersGovernment of Jiangsu Province
KeywordsModal verbModalLinguisticsValue (mathematics)Meaning (existential)Computer sciencePsychologyNatural language processingVerbPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

By adopting a corpus-based approach, the study explores how Chinese EFL learners differ from native English speakers in the use of modal verbs in different genres. Results show that Chinese EFL learners significantly overuse modal verbs both in speaking and writing. In addition, their overuses of the high-value modal verbs of must, should and have to also achieve the significant level. However, Chinese EFL learners significantly underuse the low-value modal verbs of would, might and could in comparison with native English speakers. It is hypothesized that Chinese EFL learners’ improper uses of modal verbs are caused by the negative transfer from Chinese, in which the meaning potentials of modal verbs are different from those in English.

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 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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.032
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.083
Threshold uncertainty score0.996

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.032
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.000

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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.364
Teacher spread0.344 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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

Citations6
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of English LinguisticsSame topicSecond Language Acquisition and LearningFrench-language works237,207