An acoustic perspective on 45 years of infant speech perception, Part 1: Consonants
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract In this two‐part review, we examine major results from infant consonant (Part 1), vowel, and suprasegmental (Part 2) discrimination research over the past 45 years from an acoustic perspective —an exegesis of the developmental speech perception literature that appeals to both acoustic aspects of speech contrasts and historically relevant typological facts about the sound systems of the world's languages. We argue that infants' speech discrimination abilities are best viewed through a lens that considers both synchronic and diachronic aspects of the particular speech contrast. The key to this approach is the notion that acoustic–perceptual salience , or the relative separation of speech categories along perceptually relevant acoustic dimensions and corresponding discrimination performance in adults, is reflected in both infants perceptual performance and patterns observed in phonological typology and history. The review highlights challenges presented by four decades of literature, identifies broad patterns in infant consonant perception according to the acoustic properties of speech contrasts, and offers linguistically motivated explanations and directions for future research into the nature of young infants' discrimination abilities.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 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".