Production of American English consonants /v/ and /w/ by Hindi speakers of English
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
Abstract Previous research revealed that Hindi speakers identify American English (AE) phonemes /v/ and /w/ with only chance accuracy. Building on these findings, this study explored the production of AE /v/ and /w/ by Hindi speakers, utilizing both acoustic analysis of second formant (F2) onset and AE listeners’ ratings. Participants included two groups of Hindi-English bilinguals, one residing in the US for more than 5 years, one residing in India, and a group of monolingual AE speakers. Results indicated significant differences in F2 onset between AE speakers and Hindi groups, with AE speakers differentiating the consonants more than the Hindi speakers did. The F2 onset of the Hindi speakers who had resided in the US differed from the F2 onsets produced by those with no AE immersion experience in certain conditions only. AE listeners rated only a few productions from Hindi speakers as accurate representations of AE /v/ and /w/. AE /v/-/w/ is difficult for Hindi speakers to produce contrastively, even for those who have resided in the US for several years.
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 | 0.001 | 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 it