Cebuano-Visayan Interference and Word Articulation of English Phonology Learners
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Languages inherently vary in features, and individuals aspiring to learn a language beyond their mother tongue may experience linguistic interference. This study examines interference-related errors among foreign language learners of English in the Philippines. Thirty-seven purposively selected foreign language learners of English participated in this study by reading a set of English words categorized according to sound components. Data were analyzed using Corder’s Error analysis model. Most interference-related errors occur with vowel phonemes, as Cebuano-Visayan has only three vowel nuclei: /a/, /i/, /u/, while General American English has significantly more. Moreover, consonant interference-related errors are mostly caused by aspiration and phonemic non-existence. Also, misarticulation of consonant phonemes does not affect semantics, but it impacts clarity and overall fluency in communication. The study concludes that educators must understand phonological interference to design teaching strategies that help learners overcome language learning complexities caused by first-language habits.
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 | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 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) | 0.008 | 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".