MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7133060827

Pre-velar /æ/-raising in Ontario and Colorado English: Production, Perception and Metalinguistic Awareness

2022· dissertation· W7133060827 on OpenAlexfundaboutno aff
Lisa Sullivan

Bibliographic record

VenueTSpace · 2022
Typedissertation
Language
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicLinguistic Variation and Morphology
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersSocial Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada
KeywordsMetalinguisticsMetalinguistic awarenessPerceptionProcess (computing)Raising (metalworking)Phonological awarenessSecond language
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Pre-velar /æ/-raising (BAG-raising) is a process in which some speakers of North Amer- ican English raise /æ/ before /g/, but not /k/. This process occurs in parts of Canada (e.g. Boberg, 2008), and in the Pacific Northwest (e.g. Freeman, 2021) and Upper Midwest (e.g. Koffi, 2013) in the US. While documentation of the production of BAG-raising is limited, less is known about its perception. Previous studies find no difference between how BAG-raisers and non-raisers perceive raising (Freeman, 2019; Sullivan, 2020a); however, anecdotal evidence suggests individuals from dialect regions without BAG-raising perceive the raised /æ/ in [æg] words as distinct from its unraised counterpart while those from BAG-raising regions do not. This dissertation seeks to establish if listeners hear raised and unraised /æ/ as distinct pronunciations, and if this is conditioned by production, metalinguistic awareness and/or phonological context. First, a metalinguistic awareness survey confirmed anecdotal evidence for differences in metalinguistic awareness between individuals from BAG-raising and non-raising regions. Individuals from non-raising regions had more metalinguistic awareness than those from BAG-raising regions. The study demonstrates that it may be possible to quantify metalinguistic awareness, though more work is needed to establish how best to do so, and which aspects of folk linguistic awareness (Preston, 1996) different tasks are tapping into. Next, a production study extended knowledge about the distribution of the production of BAG-raising to Colorado, where it has not been previously studied, and Ontario, where it has been studied, but not specifically targeted (Boberg, 2008; Sullivan, 2020a). This study showed that BAG-raising occurs in Ontario, but not Colorado. Finally, an AX discrimination task explored if speakers could discriminate raised and unraised /æ/ and if this was conditioned by their individual degree of BAG-raising, their metalinguistic awareness or the phonological context of /æ/. Listeners with higher degrees of BAG-raising discriminated raised and unraised /æ/ less than those with lower degrees of BAG-raising, but only before /g/, suggesting that production is implicated in perception and that mental representations are formed based on an individual’s production and the phonological context in which a sound occurs.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.931
Threshold uncertainty score0.139

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0040.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.371
Teacher spread0.335 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTSpaceSame topicLinguistic Variation and MorphologyFrench-language works237,207