Aquisição fonológica na criança: tradução e adaptação de um instrumento de avaliação interlinguístico para o português europeu
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A avaliação fonológica da criança em contexto clínico envolve o controlo de aspetos específicos, devendo permitir avaliar de forma detalhada, célere, eficaz e dirigida para a intervenção. Considerando estes aspetos, a presente investigação tem como objetivo principal desenvolver e validar um teste de avaliação fonológica infantil, assente em pressupostos de fonologia não-linear. O instrumento desenvolvido insere-se no âmbito de um projeto internacional, o Crosslinguistic Chid Phonolgy Project (CLCP), sedeado na University of British Columbia (Canadá). Na construção e validação da versão portuguesa do instrumento (CLCP-PE), contemplaram-se vários procedimentos para conferir validade e fiabilidade ao mesmo. Para a seleção dos itens, definiram-se critérios de natureza linguística e extralinguística, tendo sido usadas as seguintes variáveis fonológicas: i) inventário segmental (todas as classes naturais); ii) constituência silábica (Ataque simples, Ataque ramificado e Coda); iii) acento de palavra (contraste posição tónica /átona); iv) posição na palavra (inicial, medial, final); v) extensão de palavra (medida em número de sílabas). A versão inicial do CLCP-PE, com 157 palavras e 44 cenários complexos (imagens complexas, agrupadas por temas semanticamente relacionados), foi apresentada às crianças em suporte digital e em formato de história. O teste foi aplicado a 87 crianças com desenvolvimento linguístico típico e a 3 crianças com alterações fonológicas. Posteriormente, procedeu-se à validação das variáveis fonológicas testadas e validação psicométrica. É, assim, atestada a fiabilidade e validade do CLCP-PE (de constructo e de conteúdo), disponibilizando-se uma versão com 150 itens e 42 imagens. As variáveis fonológicas testadas mostraram-se, globalmente, relevantes e produtivas, tendo sido identificadas como estruturas mais problemáticas: i) as fricativas (estabilização do traço [anterior]); ii) a distribuição prosódica das líquidas; iii) a constituência silábica (Ataque ramificado e Coda); iv) o acento de palavra (posição átona nos grupos etários mais baixos); v) a posição na palavra (Coda medial); vi) a extensão de palavra (palavras polissilábicas); Abstract: Phonological acquisition in children: adaptation and validation procedures of Crosslinguistic Child Phonology - European Portuguese Children´s phonological assessment in clinical context involves the use of tools able to assess the child´s phonological system in a short period of time, providing detailed information to be recruited during intervention. Considering the above mentioned aspects, the main goal of the present investigation is to develop and validate an assessment tool framed in the nonlinear phonological theory. The test under construction in this investigation is part of an international project, the Crosslinguistic Child Phonology Project (CLCP), developed at the University of British Columbia (Canada). In order to validate the CLCP-PE, the European Portuguese version of the test, validity and reliability procedures were included. Linguistic and non-linguistic criteria were considered; the phonological variables selected were: i) consonantal inventory of European Portuguese (all natural classes); ii) syllable structure (Branching Onset; Simple Onset and Coda); iii) word stress (stressed and unstressed contrast); iv) position within the word (initial, medial, final; v) word extension (measured in syllables). The initial version of the CLCP-PE, validated under this investigation, included 157 word and 44 complex pictures (grouped by semantic networks contexts). It was presented to 87 typically developing children and to 3 children with phonological disorders. Data was analysed by using statistical analysis in order to verify validity and reliability. Validity (of construct and of content) and reliability were demonstrated. A final version of CLCP-PE (with 150 words and 42 complex pictures) is presented. The phonological variables considered were valid to distinguish the children’s phonological behaviours; the most problematic structures identified were: i) fricatives (setting of the feature [anterior]); ii) prosodic distribution of liquids; iii) syllable constituency (Branching Onset, Coda); iv) word stress (unstressed syllables in the youngest children; v) position within the word (medial Coda); vi) word extension (polysyllabic words).
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 | 0.031 | 0.178 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.009 | 0.010 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.009 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".