MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4392112117 · doi:10.1121/10.0024985

Acquisition of Mandarin tones by Canadian first graders: Effect of prior exposure to tonal and non-tonal languages

2024· article· en· W4392112117 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Ana Meckelborg, Mimi Luu, Theresa Nguyen, Youran Lin, Fangfang Li, Karen Pollock

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of the Acoustical Society of America · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicPhonetics and Phonology Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of LethbridgeUniversity of Alberta
FundersSocial Sciences and Humanities Research CouncilSocial Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada
KeywordsMandarin ChineseTone (literature)LinguisticsFirst languagePsychologyPhonologySecond languageAudiologyMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study examines the tone productions of school-aged children with and without a tonal language background who are learning Mandarin as a second language (L2) or heritage language in Mandarin-English bilingual schools in Western Canada. Tones are frequently identified as one of the most challenging aspects of phonology for Mandarin L2 learners to acquire. In this study, tone productions of bilingual children from three home language backgrounds, English, Cantonese, and Mandarin Chinese, were compared for transcribed accuracy using mixed effects logistic regression. In addition, the fundamental frequency contours of correct tone productions were fitted with generalized additive mixed models to analyse the acoustic differences between groups. Error patterns were also analysed for possible Cantonese substitutions. Our results suggest that children with a Cantonese background are more accurate in tone productions than children with an English language background, but they also made more errors than their peers with a Mandarin language background. These findings suggest that a tonal language background could result in positive transfer among school-age children who are in the early stages of learning Mandarin as an L2.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.102
Threshold uncertainty score0.206

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.304
Teacher spread0.297 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations6
Published2024
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of the Acoustical Society of AmericaSame topicPhonetics and Phonology ResearchFrench-language works237,207