MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4416910926 · doi:10.1177/00238309251384983

Cantonese Tone Perception by Punjabi Speakers of Cantonese: Evidence and Implications for the Perceptual Assimilation Model of Second Language Speech Learning

2025· article· en· W4416910926 on OpenAlex
William Choi, Doris Sau Fung Yu, Kin Ho Chan, Veronica Ka Wai Lai

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.

Bibliographic record

VenueLanguage and Speech · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicPhonetics and Phonology Research
Canadian institutionsInstitute for Clinical Evaluative SciencesSickKids FoundationHospital for Sick Children
FundersUniversity of Hong Kong
KeywordsAssimilation (phonology)PerceptionSecond languageTone (literature)Speech perceptionContext (archaeology)PhonologyPhonetics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study tested whether the Perceptual Assimilation Model of Second Language Speech Learning (PAM-L2) predicts second language (L2) Cantonese tone discrimination across different perceptual modes. Punjabi speakers of Cantonese completed the Cantonese tone assimilation and discrimination tasks. In the assimilation task, the Punjabi listeners assimilated the Cantonese tones as two-category (TC), single-category (SC), uncategorized-categorized without overlap (UC-no), and uncategorized-categorized with partial overlap (UC-po) pairs, yielding testable predictions for PAM-L2 in the discrimination task (TC = UC-no > UC-po > SC). In the discrimination task, the model-driven predictions were largely supported in the double-talker context but not in the single-talker and pure tone contexts. These results suggest that PAM-L2 applies to phonological but not non-phonological discrimination of L2 tones. Moreover, our findings indicate that the distinction between partial and complete overlap may not be necessary for UC pairs.

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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.846
Threshold uncertainty score0.440

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)0.0000.000

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 head0.035
GPT teacher head0.387
Teacher spread0.352 · 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