MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2794157583 · doi:10.1075/tilar.22.03ros

Phonological categories and their manifestation in child phonology

2018· book-chapter· en· W2794157583 on OpenAlex
Yvan Rose

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

VenueTrends in language acquisition research · 2018
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicPhonetics and Phonology Research
Canadian institutionsMemorial University of Newfoundland
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPhonologyLinguisticsPsychologyHistoryPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The nature of phonological representations and of their acquisition by language learners has been a subject of debate since at least the 1970s. Vihman and Croft (2007) recently proposed the ‘Radical’ Templatic approach to phonology, which formally rejects segmental features as independent units of phonological representation, in spite of their central relevance within mainstream theories of phonology since at least the 1940s. In this chapter, I emphasize that abstract categories are in fact central to our characterization of phonological systems and their acquisition by language learners. I discuss longitudinal data on the development of consonants and consonant clusters in the productions of Catootje, a Dutch-learning child. I highlight several categorical effects that are readily captured in models of phonological development which embrace abstract units such as features and syllable constituents.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Research integrity, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.524
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0460.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.072
GPT teacher head0.408
Teacher spread0.336 · 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