Revisiting the role of age in second language speech acquisition
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
Abstract The present study investigated whether age of acquisition (AOA) is a significant predictor of the extent to which Korean learners of English perceive and produce two nonnative vowels and the extent to which their speech perception and production accuracy are linked. A total of 100 Korean learners of English with a varying range of AOA participated in the study by completing perception and production measurement tasks. Overall, there were significant AOA effects found in the case of Korean participants who moved to Canada before the age breakpoint range of 17.0 to 25.5, after which AOA failed to be a significant predictor of their perception and production accuracy. In addition, compared to late second language (L2) learners, early L2 learners more consistently demonstrated instances of significant perception-production correlation. This study concludes by highlighting the role of AOA in L2 speech acquisition, supporting the existence of a critical period for intelligible L2 pronunciation.
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 | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.015 | 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