MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4401183005 · doi:10.1177/00238309241264296

Aspiring to Aspirate: L2 Acquisition of English Word-Initial /p/ Over 10 Years

2024· article· en· W4401183005 on OpenAlex
Murray J. Munro, Tracey M. Derwing, Kazuya Saito

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueLanguage and Speech · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicPhonetics and Phonology Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of AlbertaSimon Fraser University
FundersSocial Sciences and Humanities Research Council of CanadaSimon Fraser UniversityUniversity of Alberta
KeywordsIntelligibility (philosophy)Voice-onset timeActive listeningLinguisticsPsychologySecond-language acquisitionAudiologyAmerican EnglishAmerican Sign LanguageMedicineVowelSign languageCommunication

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This short report describes a longitudinal examination of the acquisition of English-aspirated stops by an initial cohort of 24 adult Slavic-language (Russian, Ukrainian, and Croatian) speakers. All had arrived in Canada with low oral English proficiency, and all were enrolled in the same language instruction program at the outset. Initial bilabial stops in CVCs were recorded at eight testing times: six during the first year of the study, again at year 7, and finally at year 10. Intelligibility was evaluated through a blind listening assessment of the stop productions from the first seven testing times. Voice onset times (VOT) were measured for /p/ from all eight times. Mean /p/ intelligibility improved-mainly during a proposed Window of Maximal Opportunity for L2 speech acquisition-but remained below 100%, even after 7 years. For some speakers, early /p/ productions were minimally aspirated, with VOT increasing over time but remaining intermediate between L1 English and L1 Slavic-Language values at 10 years. However, inter-speaker variability was dramatic, with some speakers showing full intelligibility throughout the study and others showing many unintelligible productions at all times. Individual learning trajectories tended to be non-linear and often non-cumulative. Overall, these findings point to a developmental process that varies considerably from one learner to another. It also demonstrates the serious drawbacks of relying on group means to characterize the process of L2 segmental learning.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.659
Threshold uncertainty score0.995

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.000

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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.357
Teacher spread0.337 · 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