MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2809546294 · doi:10.5539/ijel.v8n5p247

Linguistic Analysis of Selected TV Cartoons and Its Impact on Language Learning

2018· article· en· W2809546294 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Muhammad Arfan Lodhi, Syeda Nimra Ibrar, Mahwish Shamim, Sumera Naz

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of English Linguistics · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicSubtitles and Audiovisual Media
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEntertainmentPsychologyHindiAffect (linguistics)CognitionLanguage acquisitionConversationLinguisticsMathematics educationCommunication

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The new generation is fascinated by the overwhelming exposition of media. Today, media is performing powerful role in the mental growth and emotional development of children. At the very first stage of cognitive development, children copy the words and expressions used in their surroundings. Cartoons and language used in them directly affect cognitive and linguistic development of children. The present study dissects the linguistic patterns and ideologies used in cartoons shown in Pakistani media. It further attempts to overlook the impact of linguistic features of cartoons on language learning propensities of children. The study adopted mixed method research design by following qual-quan approach. The linguistic analysis of the cartoons was done qualitatively whereas its impact on children’s language was measured through quantitative way. 100 students and 100 teachers were selected to determine the sample by applying random sampling technique. Self-developed questionnaire was used to collect data from the respondents. The collected data shows that cartoons are source of education, entertainment and information for children. Children can improve their language competencies by watching cartoon. However, students were found using many Hindi words in their daily conversation. Linguistic benefits of cartoon language collide with the cultural threats faced by a large number of parents. The findings of the study recommend that children should be shown level oriented and culturally specific cartoons so that students may get maximum linguistic benefits from them.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.051
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.908
Threshold uncertainty score0.984

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.051
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 science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.314
Teacher spread0.295 · 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 designNot applicable
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

Citations13
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of English LinguisticsSame topicSubtitles and Audiovisual MediaFrench-language works237,207