Gender Agreement in L3 Spanish Production among Speakers of Typologically Different Languages
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
Grammatical gender presents persistent difficulty for adult learners of Spanish in L2 acquisition; however, there is a literature gap in L3 acquisition of gender, specifically of typologically different languages. In this project, we investigate the acquisition of Spanish gender agreement by Russian (L1)/Mandarin (L1)-English (L2) speakers of Spanish (L3) and compare the findings with English(L1) speakers of Spanish (L2). Studying these languages is particularly interesting because some exhibit an explicit gender system (Spanish and Russian) while others do not (English and Mandarin). In order to examine the effect of L1/L2 influence of these languages on L3 Spanish acquisition, 55 participants completed two tasks: a picture identification task and a grammaticality judgement task. Results indicate that advanced learners of Spanish of all L1 backgrounds performed at or near ceiling. All beginner learners performed better with canonically marked masculine nouns than noncanonical feminine nouns, thus corroborating previous findings. Regarding L1 influence, Russian participants outperformed the other two groups, especially in Task 1 (Picture Identification), thereby indicating that they may be transferring to some degree the grammatical gender system of their L1. Overall, this research provides evidence that multiple factors, including structural typology and L3 proficiency level, play a role in L3 acquisition.
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 | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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