Declarative and Procedural Determinants of Second Languages
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
This volume is the outcome of the author’s observations and puzzlement over seventeen years of teaching English and French as second languages, followed by 30 years of research into the neurolinguistic aspects of bilingualism. It examines, within the framework of a neurolinguistic theory of bilingualism (Paradis, 2004), the crucial and pervasive contributions made by declarative and procedural memory to the appropriation, representation and processing of a second language. This requires careful consideration of a number of concepts associated with issues pertaining to second language research: consciousness, interface, modularity, automaticity, proficiency, accuracy, fluency, intake, ultimate attainment, switching, implicit linguistic competence and explicit metalinguistic knowledge. It is informed by data from a variety of domains, including language pathology, neuroimaging, and, from each side of the fence, practical classroom experience. This book introduces four further proposals within the framework of a neurolinguistic theory of bilingualism: (1) There are two sets of cerebral representations, those that are capable of reaching consciousness and those that are not; implicit grammar is inherently not capable of reaching consciousness. (2) The increased activation observed in neuroimaging studies during the use of a second language is not devoted to the processing of implicit linguistic competence. (3) Intake is doubly implicit. (4) Given the premise that metalinguistic knowledge cannot be converted into implicit competence, there can be no possible interface between the two.
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 | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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