MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4281852540 · doi:10.1177/13670069221099324

L1 and L2 vocabulary and word combinations of preschool children from migrant families in Italy

2022· article· en· W4281852540 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Arianna Bello, Paola Ferraresi, Silvia Stefanini, Paola Perucchini

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Bilingualism · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicLanguage Development and Disorders
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychologyVocabularyDevelopmental psychologyQuarter (Canadian coin)Neuroscience of multilingualismHome languageVocabulary developmentLinguisticsTeaching methodMathematics educationGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Purpose: This study aimed to examine the L1 and L2 linguistic profiles of preschool bilingual children of migrants, to compare the evaluations of their parents and teachers, and to identify the children with low L2 lexical skills. Method: The expressive vocabulary and word combinations of these bilingual children were assessed with the MacArthur Bates Communicative Development Inventories (MB-CDI) short-form questionnaire, by both parents, to evaluate L1 and L2-Italian, and teachers, to evaluate L2. Interviews were carried out with the parents to collect the demographic and linguistic variables. Data and analysis: The sample comprised 60 preschool bilingual children of migrants (chronological age: 37–62 months) with 15 first language (L1) minority backgrounds, and exposed to L2-Italian. A total of 60 families and 44 nursery school teachers also participated. Conclusion: Almost two-thirds (61.4%) of these preschool bilingual children of migrants showed greater expressive vocabulary in L2 than L1. The children’s word combinations were advanced in L2 in 84.8%, and in L1 in 27.1%. Parents attributed higher language skills in L2-Italian to their children than teachers, although assessments of parents and teachers were correlated. Almost a quarter of the children (24.6%) showed low lexical skills in L2, which is explained by shorter exposure time to L2 at school. Originality: The characteristics of the L1 and L2 linguistic profiles of preschool bilingual children have been little studied to date, although these children are increasingly present in school contexts. There is the need to identify children who are slow in acquisition of L2, along with the contextual-linguistic factors that explain this slowed language acquisition. Implications: The availability of a relevant and rapid tool (MB-CDI questionnaire) to estimate knowledge in L1 and L2 that is suitable for migrant parents and teachers provides important information for assessment of the L2 skills of such bilingual children of migrants.

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)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.130
Threshold uncertainty score0.410

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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 integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.277
Teacher spread0.270 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations4
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of BilingualismSame topicLanguage Development and DisordersFrench-language works237,207