Sign language, like spoken language, promotes object categorization in young hearing infants

America's population is more diverse than ever before. The prevalence of students who are culturally and/or linguistically diverse (CLD) has been steadily increasing over the past decade. The changes in America's demographics require teachers who provide services to students with deafblindness to have an increased awareness of different cultures and diversity in today's classrooms, particularly regarding communication choices. Children who are deafblind may use spoken language with appropriate amplification, sign language or modified sign language, and/or some form of augmentative and alternative communication (AAC).

Download Full-text

The Medium and the Message

Sign Language & Linguistics ◽

10.1075/sll.2.2.04san ◽

1999 ◽

Vol 2 (2) ◽

pp. 187-215 ◽

Cited By ~ 34

Author(s):

Wendy Sandler

Keyword(s):

Facial Expression ◽

Sign Language ◽

Spoken Language ◽

Sign Languages ◽

Prosodic Word ◽

Special Stress ◽

New Perspective ◽

New Evidence ◽

Phonological Phrase ◽

The Relationship

In natural communication, the medium through which language is transmitted plays an important and systematic role. Sentences are broken up rhythmically into chunks; certain elements receive special stress; and, in spoken language, intonational tunes are superimposed onto these chunks in particular ways — all resulting in an intricate system of prosody. Investigations of prosody in Israeli Sign Language demonstrate that sign languages have comparable prosodic systems to those of spoken languages, although the phonetic medium is completely different. Evidence for the prosodic word and for the phonological phrase in ISL is examined here within the context of the relationship between the medium and the message. New evidence is offered to support the claim that facial expression in sign languages corresponds to intonation in spoken languages, and the term “superarticulation” is coined to describe this system in sign languages. Interesting formaldiffer ences between the intonationaltunes of spoken language and the “superarticulatory arrays” of sign language are shown to offer a new perspective on the relation between the phonetic basis of language, its phonological organization, and its communicative content.

Download Full-text

Visible Meaning: Sign language and the foundations of semantics

Theoretical Linguistics ◽

10.1515/tl-2018-0012 ◽

2018 ◽

Vol 44 (3-4) ◽

pp. 123-208 ◽

Cited By ~ 7

Author(s):

Philippe Schlenker

Keyword(s):

Sign Language ◽

Crucial Role ◽

Universal Grammar ◽

Logical Form ◽

Indirect Evidence ◽

Spoken Language ◽

One Dimension ◽

Dynamic Binding ◽

Sign Languages ◽

Context Shift

AbstractWhile it is now accepted that sign languages should inform and constrain theories of ‘Universal Grammar’, their role in ‘Universal Semantics’ has been under-studied. We argue that they have a crucial role to play in the foundations of semantics, for two reasons. First, in some casessign languages provide overt evidence on crucial aspects of the Logical Form of sentences, ones that are only inferred indirectly in spoken language. For instance, sign language ‘loci’ are positions in signing space that can arguably realize logical variables, and the fact that they are overt makes it possible to revisit foundational debates about the syntactic reality of variables, about mechanisms of temporal and modal anaphora, and about the existence of dynamic binding. Another example pertains to mechanisms of ‘context shift’, which were postulated on the basis of indirect evidence in spoken language, but which are arguably overt in sign language. Second, along one dimensionsign languages are strictly more expressive than spoken languagesbecause iconic phenomena can be found at their logical core. This applies to loci themselves, which maysimultaneouslyfunction as logical variables and as schematic pictures of what they denote (context shift comes with some iconic requirements as well). As a result, the semantic system of spoken languages can in some respects be seen as a simplified version of the richer semantics found in sign languages. Two conclusions could be drawn from this observation. One is that the full extent of Universal Semantics can only be studied in sign languages. An alternative possibility is that spoken languages have comparable expressive mechanisms, but only when co-speech gestures are taken into account (as recently argued by Goldin-Meadow and Brentari). Either way, sign languages have a crucial role to play in investigations of the foundations of semantics.

Download Full-text

Visions of Co-Enrollment in Deaf Education

Co-Enrollment in Deaf Education ◽

10.1093/oso/9780190912994.003.0016 ◽

2019 ◽

pp. 325-346

Author(s):

Marc Marschark ◽

Harry Knoors ◽

Shirin Antia

Keyword(s):

General Education ◽

Sign Language ◽

Academic Outcomes ◽

Deaf Education ◽

Spoken Language ◽

Classroom Teachers ◽

Active Engagement ◽

Education Curriculum ◽

General Education Curriculum ◽

Similarities And Differences

This chapter discusses similarities and differences among the co-enrollment programs described in this volume. In doing so, it emphasizes the diversity among deaf learners and the concomitant difficulty of a “one size fits all” approach to co-enrollment programs as well as to deaf education at large. The programs described in this book thus understandably are also diverse in their approach to programming and to communication, in particular. For example, many encourage flexible use of spoken and sign modalities to encourage communication between DHH students, their hearing peers, and their classroom teachers. Others emphasize spoken language or sign language. Several programs include multi-grade classrooms, allowing DHH students to benefit socially and academically from active engagement in the classroom, and some report positive social and academic outcomes. Most programs follow a general education curriculum; all emphasize collaboration among staff as the key to success.

Download Full-text

Establishing a Bimodal Bilingual Co-Enrollment Program in Germany: Preconditions, Policy, and Preliminary Data

Co-Enrollment in Deaf Education ◽

10.1093/oso/9780190912994.003.0008 ◽

2019 ◽

pp. 149-164

Author(s):

Johannes Hennies ◽

Kristin Hennies

Keyword(s):

Sign Language ◽

Hard Of Hearing ◽

Preliminary Data ◽

Spoken Language ◽

The Political ◽

Bilingual Programs ◽

Regular School ◽

Schools For The Deaf ◽

Hearing Children

In 2016, the first German bimodal bilingual co-enrollment program for deaf and hard-of-hearing (DHH) students, CODAs, and other hearing children was established in Erfurt, Thuringia. There is a tradition of different models of co-enrollment for DHH children in a spoken language setting in Germany, but there has been no permanent program for co-enrollment of DHH children who use sign language so far. This program draws from the experience of an existing model in Austria to enroll a group of DHH children using sign language in a regular school and from two well-documented bimodal bilingual programs in German schools for the deaf. The chapter describes the preconditions for the project, the political circumstances of the establishment of bimodal bilingual co-enrollment, and the factors that seem crucial for successful realization.

Download Full-text

Deaf children need language, not (just) speech

First Language ◽

10.1177/0142723719834102 ◽

2019 ◽

Vol 39 (4) ◽

pp. 367-395 ◽

Cited By ~ 16

Author(s):

Matthew L. Hall ◽

Wyatte C. Hall ◽

Naomi K. Caselli

Keyword(s):

Sign Language ◽

Cochlear Implants ◽

Research Evidence ◽

Spoken Language ◽

Deaf Children ◽

Full Potential ◽

Sign Languages ◽

Language Deprivation ◽

Language Exposure ◽

Harmful Effects

Deaf and Hard of Hearing (DHH) children need to master at least one language (spoken or signed) to reach their full potential. Providing access to a natural sign language supports this goal. Despite evidence that natural sign languages are beneficial to DHH children, many researchers and practitioners advise families to focus exclusively on spoken language. We critique the Pediatrics article ‘Early Sign Language Exposure and Cochlear Implants’ (Geers et al., 2017) as an example of research that makes unsupported claims against the inclusion of natural sign languages. We refute claims that (1) there are harmful effects of sign language and (2) that listening and spoken language are necessary for optimal development of deaf children. While practical challenges remain (and are discussed) for providing a sign language-rich environment, research evidence suggests that such challenges are worth tackling in light of natural sign languages providing a host of benefits for DHH children – especially in the prevention and reduction of language deprivation.

Download Full-text

Spoken Language to Sign Language Translation System Based on HamNoSys

Proceedings of the 2019 International Symposium on Signal Processing Systems - SSPS 2019 ◽

10.1145/3364908.3365300 ◽

2019 ◽

Author(s):

Zhehan Kang

Keyword(s):

Sign Language ◽

Language Translation ◽

Spoken Language ◽

Translation System

Download Full-text

Coherence relations across speech and sign language

Languages in Contrast ◽

10.1075/lic.19010.cri ◽

2020 ◽

Author(s):

Ludivine Crible ◽

Sílvia Gabarró-López

Keyword(s):

Sign Language ◽

Common Core ◽

Geographical Area ◽

Spoken Language ◽

Contrastive Analysis ◽

Coherence Relations ◽

Additive Relation ◽

Coherence Relation ◽

Discourse Functions

Abstract This paper provides the first contrastive analysis of a coherence relation (viz. addition) and its connectives across a sign language (French Belgian Sign Language) and a spoken language (French), both used in the same geographical area. The analysis examines the frequency and types of connectives that can express an additive relation, in order to contrast its “markedness” in the two languages, that is, whether addition is marked by dedicated connectives or by ambiguous, polyfunctional ones. Furthermore, we investigate the functions of the most frequent additive connective in each language (namely et and the sign SAME), starting from the observation that most connectives are highly polyfunctional. This analysis intends to show which functions are compatible with the meaning of addition in spoken and signed discourse. Despite a common core of shared discourse functions, the equivalence between et and SAME is only partial and relates to a difference in their semantics.

Download Full-text