Acquisition of Sign Language as a Second Language

Pichler, Deborah Chen; Koulidobrova, Elena

doi:10.1093/oxfordhb/9780190241414.013.14

Cited by 57 publications

(50 citation statements)

References 24 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The remaining six students had limited exposure to learning a second spoken language, i.e. the modality of their first acquired language (L1), which can be written as M1L1 following Chen Pichler & Koulidobrova (2011). Even though the group was of mixed language exposure, the exploratory nature of the study meant that we were interested to see whether these were factors that influenced language learning and interpreting learning.…”

Section: Language Learningmentioning

confidence: 99%

Sign language interpreter aptitude: The trials and tribulations of a longitudinal study

Stone

2017

Trans-Int

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper discusses the process of undertaking an exploratory longitudinal study of language learning and interpreter aptitude. It discusses the context of aptitude testing, the test selection for a test battery, the recruitment of subjects within the small-scale study (n=22) and the administration of that battery within the context of whether longitudinal studies are feasible with small cohorts of sign language interpreters. Sign languages continue to be languages of limited diffusion in Europe. Even with gradually increasing numbers of 'hearing' sign language users, typically those wishing to become sign language interpreters do not have high levels of sign language fluency prior to enrolling in sign language interpreter training. As such, these students need to gain fluency in sign language, whilst also beginning to engage in interpreter education and interpreting-skills development. To date there is little understanding of how best to screen sign language interpreter program applicants to ensure the effective use of resources, i.e. to educate those who will both learn sign language to C1 fluency (Pro-signs, 2016) during the BA and also be able to learn how to interpret. Longitudinal studies enable us to take a longer view of learning and the professionalisation of skills and knowledge. They do, however, require significant time and this in itself can prove to be an obstacle when university researchers are required to produce tangible research outputs for career goals such as promotion or tenure.

show abstract

Section: Language Learningmentioning

confidence: 99%

Sign language interpreter aptitude: The trials and tribulations of a longitudinal study

Stone

2017

Trans-Int

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…For this reason some researchers use the designation M2L2 to highlight that these L2 learners are learning in their second modality (M2) (Chen Pichler, 2012). While some M2L2 signers become quite fluent and use the sign language on a regular basis (for example, as sign language interpreters), very few research studies address either their course of sign language development or ultimate attainment (see Chen Pichler & Koulidobrova, 2016 for further discussion). Almost all studies of adult bimodal bilingualism focus exclusively on participants who grew up using a sign language.…”

Section: Bimodal Bilingualismmentioning

confidence: 99%

The development of bimodal bilingualism

Lillo‐Martin¹,

Quadros

Pichler

2016

LAB

Self Cite

100

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A wide range of linguistic phenomena contribute to our understanding of the architecture of the human linguistic system. In this paper we present a proposal dubbed Language Synthesis to capture bilingual phenomena including code-switching and ‘transfer’ as automatic consequences of the addition of a second language, using basic concepts of Minimalism and Distributed Morphology. Bimodal bilinguals, who use a sign language and a spoken language, provide a new type of evidence regarding possible bilingual phenomena, namely code-blending, the simultaneous production of (aspects of) a message in both speech and sign. We argue that code-blending also follows naturally once a second articulatory interface is added to the model. Several different types of code-blending are discussed in connection to the predictions of the Synthesis model. Our primary data come from children developing as bimodal bilinguals, but our proposal is intended to capture a wide range of bilingual effects across any language pair.

show abstract

“…Recently, research on second language learning has extended beyond the focus on spoken languages and has included investigations of bimodal bilinguals who have acquired a spoken and a signed language. Someone with an L1 spoken language who learns a sign language later in life is sometimes considered an "M2-L2" learner because not only are they learning a second language but they are also acquiring a second modality (M2) (see Chen Pichler & Koulidobrova, 2015). Sign languages and spoken languages use distinct articulators-the hands versus the vocal tract-and thus learning a sign language necessarily includes the integration of new phonological and articulatory systems for L1 spoken-language users.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Cross-modal translation priming and iconicity effects in deaf signers and hearing learners of American Sign Language

Mott¹,

Midgley

Holcomb

et al. 2020

Bilingualism

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study used ERPs to a) assess the neural correlates of cross-linguistic, cross-modal translation priming in hearing beginning learners of American Sign Language (ASL) and deaf highly proficient signers and b) examine whether sign iconicity modulates these priming effects. Hearing learners exhibited translation priming for ASL signs preceded by English words (greater negativity for unrelated than translation primes) later in the ERP waveform than deaf signers and exhibited earlier and greater priming for iconic than non-iconic signs. Iconicity did not modulate translation priming effects either behaviorally or in the ERPs for deaf signers (except in a 800–1000 ms time window). Because deaf signers showed early translation priming effects (beginning at 400ms-600ms), we suggest that iconicity did not facilitate lexical access, but deaf signers may have recognized sign iconicity later in processing. Overall, the results indicate that iconicity speeds lexical access for L2 sign language learners, but not for proficient signers.

show abstract

Acquisition of Sign Language as a Second Language

Cited by 57 publications

References 24 publications

Sign language interpreter aptitude: The trials and tribulations of a longitudinal study

Sign language interpreter aptitude: The trials and tribulations of a longitudinal study

The development of bimodal bilingualism

Cross-modal translation priming and iconicity effects in deaf signers and hearing learners of American Sign Language

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About