Word meaning types acquired before vs. after age 5: implications for education
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This article concerns two types of word meanings: nonverbal meanings which appear to be associated with neurological representations and verbally-based meanings which appear to depend in part on other words to construct meanings. Using word use data from Hart and Risley's study of children aged 19 to 36 months, and word meaning knowledge data from Biemiller and Slonim's studies of children between aged 5 to 11, meanings were classified as nonverbal or verbally-based. Biemiller and Slonim used sampled word meanings reported known from grade levels 2 to 12 reported by Dale and O'Rourke in their Living Word Vocabulary. Virtually all meanings used at age 3 or known at age 5 (preschool) were classified nonverbal. By grade two, and even more by grade five, children had added many verbally-defined meanings, although by grade five the majority of the word meanings known were still nonverbal. Evidence for neurological meaning associates are cited. Implications for vocabulary support and instruction at various ages suggest that for children under 6, supporting larger nonverbal vocabularies while after age 6 should prioritize verbally-defined meanings.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.012 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".