Modeling monolingual and bilingual children’s language attitudes towards variation in metropolitan France
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study investigates four factors (age, sex, SES, and bilingualism) influencing children's language attitude (LA) development. We examine LAs in monolingual (N = 46) and bilingual (N = 71) children (59-143 months) living in France using a matched guise experiment where the children evaluated normative and non-normative variants of five linguistic constructions in French. Using a mixed-effects model, we show that children's preferences for normative variants increase with age, and each linguistic construction documented is subject to different attitudinal timeframes. The probabilities of preferring the normative variants are significantly higher for monolingual girls than for bilingual girls. Whilst lower-class and upper-class children's LAs are similar, low-to-middle-class children's responses are more random, which may illustrate the potential effects of linguistic insecurity. We discuss how the children's construction of the sociocognitive representations of linguistic variation could be explained by considering children's language exposure and experiences of socialisation.
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 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 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".