Narrative competences of Deaf children in German Sign Language

2009 ◽  
Vol 12 (2) ◽  
pp. 113-160 ◽  
Author(s):  
Claudia Becker
Keyword(s):  
Conversation Analysis ◽  
Sign Language ◽  
Language Proficiency ◽  
Deaf Children ◽  
Cognitive Approach ◽  
Narrative Skills ◽  
Deaf Adults ◽  
Everyday Interaction ◽  
Hearing Children ◽  
German Sign Language

Hearing children acquire discourse competences like storytelling through everyday interaction and are systematically supported in this process by adults. In contrast, deaf children in Germany often lack appropriate interlocutors with German Sign Language proficiency in family or school. The focus of our research is on narrative competences in deaf children and on the consequences of the lack of interlocutors on the acquisition of these competences. We carried out three studies to examine narrative skills of deaf children aged 8 to 17. We collected data from dyadic conversations with deaf adults and analyzed this data against the background of a cognitive approach to language acquisition and of conversation analysis. From a developmental perspective, our results indicate that the narrative competences of most of the tested non-native signing children have not developed as would be appropriate for their age. From an interactive perspective, deaf adults cooperate with the children in telling their stories by using different strategies.

scholarly journals Adaptation of the British Sign Language Receptive Skills Test into Polish Sign Language

2020 ◽  
pp. 026553222092459
Author(s):  
Justyna Kotowicz ◽  
Bencie Woll ◽  
Rosalind Herman
Keyword(s):  
Sign Language ◽  
Language Proficiency ◽  
Standardized Test ◽  
Item Analysis ◽  
Deaf Children ◽  
British Sign Language ◽  
Native Signers ◽  
Age Range ◽  
British Sign

The evaluation of sign language proficiency needs to be based on measures with well-established psychometric proprieties. To date, no valid and reliable test is available to assess Polish Sign Language ( Polski Język Migowy, PJM) skills in deaf children. Hence, our aim with this study was to adapt the British Sign Language Receptive Skills Test (the first standardized test to determine sign language proficiency in children) into PJM, a less researched sign language. In this paper, we present the first steps in the adaptation process and highlight linguistic and cultural similarities and differences between the British Sign Language Receptive Skills Test and the PJM adaptation. We collected data from 20 deaf children who were native signers (age range: 6 to 12) and 30 deaf children who were late learners of PJM (age range: 6 to 13). Preliminary analyses showed that the PJM Receptive Skills Test has acceptable psychometric characteristics (item analysis, validity, reliability, and sensitivity to age). Our long-term goal with this work was to include younger children (age range: 3 to 6) and to standardize the PJM Receptive Skills Tests, so that it can be used in educational settings and in scientific research.

scholarly journals Validity evidence for a sentence repetition test of Swiss German Sign Language

2020 ◽  
Vol 37 (3) ◽  
pp. 412-434
Author(s):  
Tobias Haug ◽  
Aaron Olaf Batty ◽  
Martin Venetz ◽  
Christa Notter ◽  
Simone Girard-Groeber ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Language Development ◽  
Sign Language ◽  
School Context ◽  
Analysis Of Covariance ◽  
Swiss German ◽  
Sentence Repetition ◽  
Cognitive Framework ◽  
Deaf Adults ◽  
Show Evidence ◽  
German Sign Language

In this study we seek evidence of validity according to the socio-cognitive framework (Weir, 2005) for a new sentence repetition test (SRT) for young Deaf L1 Swiss German Sign Language (DSGS) users. SRTs have been developed for various purposes for both spoken and sign languages to assess language development in children. In order to address the need for tests to assess the grammatical development of Deaf L1 DSGS users in a school context, we developed an SRT. The test targets young learners aged 6–17 years, and we administered it to 46 Deaf students aged 6.92–17.33 ( M = 11.17) years. In addition to the young learner data, we collected data from Deaf adults ( N = 14) and from a sub-sample of the children ( n = 19) who also took a test of DSGS narrative comprehension, serving as a criterion measure. We analyzed the data with many-facet Rasch modeling, regression analysis, and analysis of covariance. The results show evidence of scoring, criterion, and context validity, suggesting the suitability of the SRT for the intended purpose, and will inform the revision of the test for future use as an instrument to assess the sign language development of Deaf children.

scholarly journals Deaf Mothers: Communication, Activism, and the Family

2010 ◽  
Vol 30 (3/4) ◽  
Author(s):  
Cheryl Najarian Souza
Keyword(s):  
Language Choice ◽  
Deaf Children ◽  
The Social ◽  
The Family ◽  
Deaf Adults ◽  
Deaf Women ◽  
Hearing Children ◽  
College Educated

This article examines the mothering experiences of college educated Deaf women and connects this to their identities as part of the Deaf community. Using feminist life history interviews with ten Deaf women, the analysis focuses on their work as mothers and the connections with "maternal thinking," difference, and sameness. Findings include an analysis of the various strategies that these mothers used in their mothering, which include teaching the skills of lifetime educators and self-advocates to deaf children, sending their hearing children to Kids of Deaf Adults (KODA) camps and incorporating their activism and volunteering in their mothering. The author argues that an analysis of ability along with gender is useful to further current theorizing about gender and mothering as a kind of work and that an analysis of the role of language allows us to question the idea that mothering is an innate quality of women. Instead, the author argues that, due to the social context of their life situations, "maternal thinking" and language choice are learned practices that these women negotiate in their work as mothers.

scholarly journals Adoption of the sign language with deaf and hard of hearing preschool children

Bastina ◽  
2020 ◽  
pp. 513-535
Author(s):  
Tamara Kovačević ◽  
Ljubica Isaković
Keyword(s):  
Preschool Children ◽  
Sign Language ◽  
Hard Of Hearing ◽  
Critical Period ◽  
Spoken Language ◽  
Preschool Age ◽  
Deaf Children ◽  
The Family ◽  
Adults And Children ◽  
Hearing Children

This study analyses the process of adopting of the sign language with deaf and hard of hearing preschool children in the context of the result of linguistic and psycholinguistic research. The importance of the sign language is emphasized and its historical development is analyzed. It is pointed to the significance of the critical period for the adoption and the learning of the sign and spoken language with deaf and hard of hearing preschool children. The sign language is natural and primary linguistic expression of deaf children. Deaf and hard of hearing children are exposed to the sign and spoken language, they have better understanding and linguistic production than the children who are only exposed to the spoken language. Bilingualism involves the knowledge and the regular use of the sign language, which is used by the deaf community, and of the spoken language, which is used by the hearing majority. Children at the preschool age should be enabled to continue to adopt the language they started to adopt within the family (the sign language or the spoken language). Children will adopt the best both linguistic modalities through the interaction with other fluent speakers (the adults and children).

Code mixing in mother–child interaction in deaf families

2005 ◽  
Vol 8 (1-2) ◽  
pp. 153-176 ◽  
Author(s):  
Beppie van denBogaerde ◽  
Anne Baker
Keyword(s):  
Sign Language ◽  
Mixed Type ◽  
Deaf Children ◽  
Code Mixing ◽  
Child Interaction ◽  
Mixed Language ◽  
Definition Of ◽  
Hearing Children ◽  
Mixed Code ◽  
Strict Definition

In this paper we discuss the mixed language input of four deaf mothers and the mixed output of their three deaf and three hearing children. Taking a strict definition of code-mixing (as defined by Muysken 2000) we find that the deaf mothers mainly use a form of code-mixing, or mixed code-blending, called congruent lexicalization, which results in a mixed form between NGT (Sign Language of the Netherlands) and Dutch in a structure which is compatible with both NGT and Dutch. The deaf children (up to 3 years), who are only just beginning to become bilingual, hardly produce any code-mixed utterances. The hearing children, however, are clearly bilingual in NGT and Dutch, and use code-blending of the mixed type in more or less the same form as their mother does.

Code-Mixing in Moeder-Kind Interactie in Dove Families

2002 ◽  
Vol 68 ◽  
pp. 49-63
Author(s):  
Anne Baker ◽  
Beppie van den Bogaerde
Keyword(s):  
Sign Language ◽  
The Other ◽  
Deaf Children ◽  
Mixed Form ◽  
Code Mixing ◽  
Other Hand ◽  
Language Data ◽  
Language Input ◽  
Hearing Children

In this article, we discuss the mixed input offered by four profoundly deaf mothers and the mixed output of their deaf and hearing children. Muysken (2000) distinguishes different forms of code-mixing: insertion, alternation and congruent lexicalisation. We applied these definitions to these language data and found that the mothers used mainly the last type of code-mixing, namely congruent lexicalisation. This results in a mixed form of NGT (Nederlandse Gebarentaal, 'Dutch Sign Language') and Dutch, in which the structure of the utterance is grammatical in both NGT and Dutch. Lexical insertion also occurs, both in the basically NGT utterances and in the Dutch utterances. The deaf children (up to age three) are just beginning to become bilingual and hardly produce any mixed utterances. The hearing children, on the other hand, clearly show that they code-mix, under the influence of the language input.

Developing Sign Language Measurements for Research With Deaf Populations

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jon Henner ◽  
Robert Hoffmeister ◽  
Jeanne Reis
Keyword(s):  
American Sign Language ◽  
Sign Language ◽  
Hard Of Hearing ◽  
Assessment Instrument ◽  
Deaf Children ◽  
American Sign ◽  
Language Deprivation ◽  
Signed Language ◽  
Language Assessments ◽  
Hearing Children

Limited choices exist for assessing the signed language development of deaf and hard of hearing children. Over the past 30 years, the American Sign Language Assessment Instrument (ASLAI) has been one of the top choices for norm-referenced assessment of deaf and hard of hearing children who use American Sign Language. Signed language assessments can also be used to evaluate the effects of a phenomenon known as language deprivation, which tends to affect deaf children. They can also measure the effects of impoverished and idiosyncratic nonstandard signs and grammar used by educators of the deaf and professionals who serve the Deaf community. This chapter discusses what was learned while developing the ASLAI and provides guidelines for educators and researchers of the deaf who seek to develop their own signed language assessments.

Language Development and Deaf Children

2006 ◽  
Author(s):  
Marc Marschark ◽  
Harry G. Lang ◽  
John A. Albertini
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Academic Success ◽  
Language Development ◽  
Sign Language ◽  
The United States ◽  
Spoken Language ◽  
Deaf Children ◽  
University Center ◽  
Language Modality ◽  
Hearing Children

To understand the complex relations between language and learning, we have to look at both how children learn language and what it is that they learn that allows them to communicate with others. To accomplish this, we need to distinguish between apparent differences in language that are related to the modality of communication and actual differences in language fluencies observed among deaf children. It also will help to examine some relevant differences between deaf children and hearing children. We have already pointed out that the distinction between spoken language and sign language, while a theoretically important one for researchers, is an oversimplification for most practical purposes. It is rare that deaf children are exposed only to spoken language or sign language, even if that is the intention of their parents or teachers. According to 1999 data, approximately 55 percent of deaf children in the United States are formally educated in programs that report either using sign language exclusively (just over 5 percent) or signed and spoken language together (just over 49 percent) (Gallaudet University, Center for Applied Demographic Statistics). Because almost half of all deaf children in the United States are missed in such surveys, however, these numbers only should be taken as approximate. Comparisons of the language abilities of deaf children who primarily use sign language with those who primarily use spoken language represent one of the most popular and potentially informative areas in research relating to language development and academic success. Unfortunately, this area is also one of the most complex. Educational programs emphasizing spoken or sign language often have different educational philosophies and curricula as well as different communication philosophies. Programs may only admit children with particular histories of early intervention, and parents will be drawn to different programs for a variety of reasons. Differences observed between children from any two programs thus might be the result of a number of variables rather than, or in addition to, language modality per se. Even when deaf children are educated in spoken language environments, they often develop systems of gestural communication with their parents (Greenberg et al., 1984).

scholarly journals Sign Language Echolalia in Deaf Children With Autism Spectrum Disorder

2017 ◽  
Vol 60 (6) ◽  
pp. 1622-1634 ◽  
Author(s):  
Aaron Shield ◽  
Frances Cooley ◽  
Richard P. Meier
Keyword(s):  
Autism Spectrum Disorder ◽  
Sign Language ◽  
Children With Autism ◽  
Receptive Language ◽  
Autism Spectrum ◽  
Spectrum Disorder ◽  
Deaf Children ◽  
Children With Asd ◽  
Language Modality ◽  
Hearing Children

Purpose We present the first study of echolalia in deaf, signing children with autism spectrum disorder (ASD). We investigate the nature and prevalence of sign echolalia in native-signing children with ASD, the relationship between sign echolalia and receptive language, and potential modality differences between sign and speech. Method Seventeen deaf children with ASD and 18 typically developing (TD) deaf children were video-recorded in a series of tasks. Data were coded for type of signs produced (spontaneous, elicited, echo, or nonecho repetition). Echoes were coded as pure or partial, and timing and reduplication of echoes were coded. Results Seven of the 17 deaf children with ASD produced signed echoes, but none of the TD deaf children did. The echoic children had significantly lower receptive language scores than did both the nonechoic children with ASD and the TD children. Modality differences also were found in terms of the directionality, timing, and reduplication of echoes. Conclusions Deaf children with ASD sometimes echo signs, just as hearing children with ASD sometimes echo words, and TD deaf children and those with ASD do so at similar stages of linguistic development, when comprehension is relatively low. The sign language modality might provide a powerful new framework for analyzing the purpose and function of echolalia in deaf children with ASD.

Gesture, speech, and sign. Lynn Messing and Ruth Campbell (Eds.). New York: Oxford University Press, 1999. Pp. 227.

2001 ◽  
Vol 22 (4) ◽  
pp. 643-647
Author(s):  
Meredith L. Rowe
Keyword(s):  
New York ◽  
Cognitive Psychology ◽  
Language Learning ◽  
Sign Language ◽  
Communication Disorders ◽  
The Other ◽  
Deaf Children ◽  
Oxford University ◽  
Sign Systems ◽  
Hearing Children

The study of gesture, especially its relationship to spoken and signed languages, has become a broadly studied topic for researchers from various fields, including neuropsychology, cognitive psychology, evolutionary psychology, human development, and communication disorders. One possible reason for the wide interest in gesture is its universality. People of all ages and cultures use gestures for various purposes. Young language-learning, hearing children often use gestures alone or in combination with speech to help express themselves to their interlocutors, for example, pointing to a desired object while saying “mine.” As a more striking example, deaf children in Nicaragua who had previously been unexposed to any conventional sign language, used gestures to develop home-sign systems that eventually developed into Nicaraguan Sign Language (Kegl, Senghas, & Coppola, 1999). On the other hand, gestures are often used in situations where the underlying purpose of the gesture is less clear. For example, people who are blind from birth are nonetheless found to gesture in conversation (Iverson & Goldin-Meadow, 1997), and adults gesture frequently, and often subconsciously, during conversations with one another. Despite their omnipresence, we know relatively little about gestures' origins, their relationship to language, and, in some instances, the purposes they serve.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document