Lexical stress assignment preferences in L2 German
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Assigning stress to the appropriate syllable is consequential for being understood. Despite the importance, second language (L2) learners' stress assignment is often incorrect, being affected by their first language (L1). Beyond the L1, learners' lexical stress assignment may depend on analogy with other words in their lexicon. The current study investigates the respective roles of the L1 (English, French) and analogy in L2 German lexical stress assignment. Because English, like German, has variable stress assignment and French does not, participants included English- and French-speaking German L2 learners who assigned stress to German nonsense words in a perceptual preference and a production task. Results suggest a role of the L1, with English-speaking German L2 learners performing more like L1 German speakers. While French-speaking German L2 learners' performance could not be predicted by other factors, L2 German proficiency and the ability to produce analogous words were predictive of English-speaking German L2 learners' production performance.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it