To What Extent Do Learner‐ and Word‐Related Variables Affect Production of Derivatives?
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 This study explores the effects of receptive derivational affix knowledge, derivative frequency, part of speech, and vocabulary breadth on production of derivatives. Twenty‐one speakers of English as a first language and 107 learners of English as a second language were asked to produce derivatives for 90 prompt words on a decontextualized derivative form‐recall test. Results indicated that (a) increased receptive derivational affix knowledge and derivative frequency were linked to greater accuracy in production of derivatives, (b) adverb derivatives were more frequently produced compared to other parts of speech, and (c) learners’ vocabulary breadth was associated with greater accuracy in producing derivatives. Results also indicated a larger facilitative effect of derivative frequency for second language learners in comparison to first language speakers, but this effect diminished as vocabulary breadth increased. These findings suggest that learners may initially acquire derivatives on a case‐by‐case basis but, as their knowledge of derivational affixes and vocabulary breadth increases, they may acquire derivatives more systematically.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.048 | 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