MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4243173372 · doi:10.3138/cmlr.61.2.251

The Particulars on Universals: A Comparison of the Acquisition of Tense-Aspect Morphology among Japanese- and French-Speaking Learners of English

2004· article· en· W4243173372 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Laura Collins

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Modern Language Review/ La Revue canadienne des langues vivantes · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicReading and Literacy Development
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLinguisticsMorphology (biology)Problem of universalsPsychologyLinguistic universalTheoretical linguisticsBiologyPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study investigated the relationship between L1 and the developmental sequences for the acquisition of temporal morphology that are predicted by the aspect hypothesis. The use of tense-aspect markers in 7,784 past contexts by 139 Japanese- and French-speaking ESL learners was analyzed. A repeated measures ANOVA supported the predictions of the aspect hypothesis. For both L1 groups, the marking of past spread from achievements and accomplishments (telics) through activities to statives, and the preferred non-past responses for statives and activities were present and progressive, respectively. The magnitude, rather than the direction, of the lexical aspect effect with achievements was the only significant L1 difference. The results lend support to the hypothesis that the influence of lexical aspect on the acquisition of grammatical morphology is a language learning universal. They are also consistent with research on other linguistic features in which selective influence of L1 on developmental sequences has been observed.

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)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.703
Threshold uncertainty score0.820

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.256
Teacher spread0.243 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
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

Citations56
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Modern Language Review/ La Revue canadienne des langues vivantesSame topicReading and Literacy DevelopmentFrench-language works237,207