MORPHOLOGICAL ERRORS AS A WAY OF STYLLYZING CHILD-NARRATOR’S SPEECH IN MODERN ENGLISH NOVELS
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The article is dedicated to the characteristics of children’s speech as exemplified in the novels «Room» by the Canadian-Irish writer E. Donoghue and «All The Lost Things» by the American writer M. Sacks. The narration in both texts is conducted on behalf of pre-school and primary school children. To give authenticity to their works the authors resort to stylizing children’s speech with the help of certain language markers. By means of continuous sampling analysis we highlighted 174 episodes from the two novels and analysed them. It was established that both writers depict morphological mistakes typical for the speech of 5 and 7 year-old children in real life. The biggest number of inaccuracies occurs in the novel «Room» (93 %), while in «All The Lost Things» their number is significantly smaller (7 %). Nevertheless, their presence in both works lets us speak about a certain tendency and consider morphological mistakes as possible language markers applied for stylizing children’s speech in a work of literature.
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 | 0.003 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".