Bibliographic record
Abstract
The present paper examines the role of children in the propagation of chain shifts. Males and females in three age groups, children (6-11), teens (13-15), and parents, are compared to determine which age and sex group is the most advanced in an ongoing chain shift in standard Canadian English: the Canadian Shift (CS) (Clarke, Elms and Youssef 1995, Labov, Ash and Boberg 2006). The CS minimally consists of the successive lowering and/or backing of the front lax vowels /æ/ and /e/. It will be seen that children, in particular girls, appear to demonstrate vowels significantly lower than teens and parents, indicating that the principles of chain shifting are active from a young age. Teens’ vowel means are backer but not significantly different from parents'. Sex differences apparent in the group of children indicate that the social factors proposed to be instrumental in chain shift advancement among teens and adults are equally relevant to children. However, a secondary examination of the Canadian Raising diphthongs reveals children fail to lead ongoing changes on the F2 dimension. This suggests that children’s vowels may be subject to a type of formant-specific age-grading, possibly as a result of differing vocal tract dimensions (Lee, Potamianos and Narayanan 1999). As a result of these maturational factors, it is suggested that children’s highly shifted vowels are not in their final positions, making their lead a temporary one. Instead, teens are probably more accurate indicators of CS pace and trajectory.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.854 | 0.771 |
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; the direct Gemma label and the distilled Codex classifier 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".