Development of singleton consonants in French-speaking children with typical versus protracted phonological development: The influence of word length, word shape and stress
Bibliographic record
Abstract
To provide preliminary reference data for singleton consonant development in children with typical development (TD) versus protracted phonological development (PPD) for Manitoba Canadian French, a language with an uncommon stress pattern (“iambic” or “right-headed”). Following a nonlinear perspective, singleton consonants were examined both as segments and in terms of the structure of words. Higher match levels for consonants were expected in shorter versus longer words and in stressed versus unstressed syllables. A larger effect was expected in children with PPD than those with TD. Participants included 20 TD children and 12 with PPD aged 2 to 4 years from Manitoba, Canada. Single words were digitally recorded by trained speech-language pathologists, transcribed by native French speakers and analysed with Phon 3.0. Friedman and Wilcoxon Signed Rank tests revealed that children with PPD had significantly more mismatches than TD children, especially in contexts of unstressed syllables in multisyllabic words. The most common mismatch (“error”) patterns were consonant substitution, consonant deletion and syllable deletion. Word length and stress were found to influence consonant development within French, similar to findings in languages with left-headed or trochaic stress. Clinically, the findings underscore the relevance of considering the child’s entire phonological system for identification of strengths and needs in assessment and intervention.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".