Morphemic Acquisition Order Testing in Third-person Inflection and Plural Sequence in Krashen’s Natural Order Hypothesis on Chinese International Students
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Since Krashen first introduced Natural Order Hypothesis (NOH) in 1980, many researchers started to test it among participants from different cultural backgrounds.NOH stated that human beings have a certain universal order to acquire their second language (L2).However, recent research articles for NOH testing after 2010 are rare.Over this decade, students' learning environment and teachers' teaching methods are rapidly changing.Whether students' Natural Order for second language acquisition (SLA) still remains the same is the research topic for this paper.In this research, our target group is Chinese first language (L1) learners of English as an L2 who study in various English-speaking countries including Canada, Singapore, the United States, and the United Kingdom with abroad experience from 6 months to 8 years.Thirty interviews are collected to create a corpus and upon which to perform error analysis to test the comparative acquisition order of third-person inflection and plural.According to the comparison result of the percentage of errors made in third-person inflection and plural in the speech of one participant, the test subjects are categorized into three types.By comparing the number of test subjects in each category, our research concludes that this test strongly supports the hypothesis that third-person inflection occurs later than plural in the morphemic acquisition order.While probing into the reasons behind the number of test subjects in each category, this research discovered interesting findings which include the positive correlation between the length of studying abroad and the invisibility of acquisition order regarding the two target morphemes and possible interference of the place of residence during the interview to the test result.In addition, this research open the discussions on new norms of standard fixed phrases in the plural as a by-product of COVID-19.Furthermore, this research found and distinguished between different types of self-corrections in corpus while questioning the boundary between learned and acquired.
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 | 0.003 | 0.009 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 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".