MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3005973141 · doi:10.1075/jslp.17042.bir

Pronunciation among adult Indigenous language learners

2020· article· en· W3005973141 on OpenAlex

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.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Second Language Pronunciation · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicPhonetics and Phonology Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Victoria
FundersSocial Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada
KeywordsPronunciationIndigenousIndigenous languageLinguisticsSet (abstract data type)Language acquisitionComputer sciencePsychologyMathematics education

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract This paper describes the features that set adult Indigenous language learning apart from other types second language learning, examining in particular the role that unique teaching and learning contexts might play in the acquisition of pronunciation. As a case study, the pronunciation of SENĆOŦEN (Coast Salish) /t’/ is compared across four groups of speakers, including two groups of adult learners. Acoustic analysis shows that /t’/, described as a weak ejective in previous work, is now consistently realized as a strong ejective, especially among learners and teachers. These findings are discussed with reference to factors relevant to language learning and teaching in general, as well as to ones relevant to Indigenous language learning and teaching in particular.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.817
Threshold uncertainty score0.998

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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 integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.302
Teacher spread0.285 · 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