Learning a Sign Language Does Not Hinder Acquisition of a Spoken Language

Abstract

Purpose: The purpose of this study is to determine whether and how learning American Sign Language (ASL) is associated with spoken English skills in a sample of ASL–English bilingual deaf and hard of hearing (DHH) children. Method: This cross-sectional study of vocabulary size included 56 DHH children between 8 and 60 months of age who were learning both ASL and spoken English and had hearing parents. English and ASL vocabulary were independently assessed via parent report checklists. Results: ASL vocabulary size positively correlated with spoken English vocabulary size. Spoken English vocabulary sizes in the ASL–English bilingual DHH children in the present sample were comparable to those in previous reports of monolingual DHH children who were learning only English. ASL–English bilingual DHH children had total vocabularies (combining ASL and English) that were equivalent to same-age hearing monolingual children. Children with large ASL vocabularies were more likely to have spoken English vocabularies in the average range based on norms for hearing monolingual children. Conclusions: Contrary to predictions often cited in the literature, acquisition of sign language does not harm spoken vocabulary acquisition. This retrospective, correlational study cannot determine whether there is a causal relationship between sign language and spoken language vocabulary acquisition, but if a causal relationship exists, the evidence here suggests that the effect would be positive. Bilingual DHH children have age-expected vocabularies when considering the entirety of their language skills. We found no evidence to support recommendations that families with DHH children avoid learning sign language. Rather, our findings show that children with early ASL exposure can develop age-appropriate vocabulary skills in both ASL and spoken English.

Exposure to sign language prior and after cochlear implantation increases language and cognitive skills in deaf children

“…Indeed, use of sign language before implantation can prevent linguistic deprivation and its detrimental impacts on language and memory development in deaf children with CIs (Hall et al, 2018;Humphries et al, 2012). On the one hand, some arguments have been put forth to suggest that deaf children with CIs should not be exposed to sign language (see Pontecorvo et al, 2023, for a review). Perhaps the most documented and empirical argument, the visual takeover hypothesis, suggests that exposure to sign language in deaf children may impair perceptual performance following cochlear implantation (e.g., Campbell et al, 2014).…”

Sign language voice convertor design using Raspberry pi for impaired individuals

“…However, these sign languages are often not known outside these communities. This makes communication between deaf and hearing people difficult [3]. A mute person finds it difficult to communicate his or her message to a general audience.…”

The NHS is failing deaf people

“…Some 87 000 deaf people use British Sign Language (BSL)3 and parents such as Kirsten Abioye are often discouraged by medical professionals from signing with their deaf child, particularly when the child has a cochlear implant. There is a belief among many health professionals that learning sign language adversely affects speech and language development, one that is not supported by empirical evidence 456…”

“…Sign language gives a deaf child the only guarantee of full access to language. It reduces the risk of language deprivation, defined as “a chronic lack of full access to a natural language during the critical period of language acquisition.”4 Despite this, it is often recommended as a last resort when speech has not developed. Late and inadequate exposure to BSL in the context of pre-existing language deprivation can lead to language dysfluency, a phenomenon where an individual is not fluent in any language 4.…”

“…It reduces the risk of language deprivation, defined as “a chronic lack of full access to a natural language during the critical period of language acquisition.”4 Despite this, it is often recommended as a last resort when speech has not developed. Late and inadequate exposure to BSL in the context of pre-existing language deprivation can lead to language dysfluency, a phenomenon where an individual is not fluent in any language 4. Dysfluency is linked to poor long term physical and mental health,789 so well intentioned advice can have a substantial negative impact on a child’s life.…”