Phonological priming in British Sign Language

Goldstein, Louis; Whalen, D. H.; Best, Catherine T.

doi:10.1515/9783110197211.1.241

Cited by 19 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The literature has identified that signers make use of the sublexical structure of signs (e.g., location, handshape, and movement) to achieve lexical access (Gutiérrez-Sigut & Baus, 2021). Therefore, our results regarding the amplitude reduction of early N400 are in line with those studies showing facilitation of lexical access by a type of movement either in isolation (Emmorey & Corina, 1990) or combined with other sublexical parameters, such as handshape (Gutiérrez, 2008) and location (Dye & Shih, 2006). Another explanation for the N400 decrease associated with CA found here could be related to the increased iconicity of the signs produced with CA as compared to PT, since N400 decreases have also been shown for more iconic signs (McGarry et al, 2023).…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 90%

Between bodily action and conventionalized structure: The neural mechanisms of constructed action in sign language comprehension.

Hernández Barros,

Puupponen,

Keränen

et al. 2023

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Sign languages (SLs) are expressed through different bodily actions, ranging from re-enactment of physical events (constructed action, CA) to sequences of lexical signs with internal structure (plain telling, PT). Despite the prevalence of CA in signed interactions and its significance for SL comprehension, its neural dynamics remain unexplored. We examined the processing of different types of CA (subtle, reduced, and overt) and PT in 35 adult deaf or hearing native signers. The electroencephalographic-based processing of signed sentences with incongruent last signs was recorded. Attenuated N300 and early N400 were observed for CA in deaf but not in hearing signers. No differences were found between sentences with CA types in all signers, suggesting a continuum from PT to overt CA. Deaf signers focused more on body movements; hearing signers on faces. We conclude that CA is processed less effortlessly than PT, arguably because of its strong focus on bodily actions.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 90%

Between bodily action and conventionalized structure: The neural mechanisms of constructed action in sign language comprehension.

Hernández Barros,

Puupponen,

Keränen

et al. 2023

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…However, we did not control for the presence of some overlapping parts (e.g., hand shape, location, or movement). Knowledge about the role of sign phonology in sign perception and production is very limited thus far, but is recently increasing (e.g., Dye & Shih, 2006;Emmorey & Corina, 1990;Ormel, Hermans, Knoors, & Verhoeven, 2009). In the future, a study such as this one could be controlled more precisely for the presence of sign distracters.…”

Section: Factors That Affect the Development Of Semantic Categorizationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Semantic categorization: A comparison between deaf and hearing children

Ormel

Gijsel

Hermans

et al. 2010

Journal of Communication Disorders

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Carreiras et al (2008) proposed that this inhibitory effect is due to activation of lexical competitors by the prime sign, which slows recognition of the target sign, and they suggested that this effect parallels the inhibition observed when spoken prime–target word pairs share initial phonemes (e.g., Hamburger & Slowiaczek, 1996). No significant priming effects have been observed for prime–target signs that have the same handshape (Carreiras et al, 2008; Corina & Emmorey, 1993), and mixed results are reported for phonological priming with movement (Corina & Emmorey, 1993; Dye & Shih, 2006). It is currently unclear why different priming patterns are observed for different phonological units in sign language, but the answer likely lies in the nature of sign-specific phonological representations—for example, handshape may be best treated as a complex autosegment that is not easily primed (Sandler, 1986)—and/or in the nature of visual processing—for example, location information is perceived prior to movement (Emmorey & Corina, 1990), which could lead to early lexical competition (Carreiras et al, 2008).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Effects of iconicity and semantic relatedness on lexical access in american sign language.

Bosworth¹,

Emmorey²

2010

Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cogni

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Iconicity is a property that pervades the lexicon of many sign languages, including American Sign Language (ASL). Iconic signs exhibit a motivated, non-arbitrary mapping between the form of the sign and its meaning. We investigated whether iconicity enhances semantic priming effects for ASL and whether iconic signs are recognized more quickly than non-iconic signs (controlling for strength of iconicity, semantic relatedness, familiarity, and imageability). Twenty deaf signers made lexical decisions to the second item of a prime-target pair. Iconic target signs were preceded by prime signs that were a) iconic and semantically related, b) non-iconic and semantically related, or c) semantically unrelated. In addition, a set of non-iconic target signs was preceded by semantically unrelated primes. Significant facilitation was observed for target signs when preceded by semantically related primes. However, iconicity did not increase the priming effect (e.g., the target sign PIANO was primed equally by the iconic sign GUITAR and the non-iconic sign MUSIC). In addition, iconic signs were not recognized faster or more accurately than non-iconic signs. These results confirm the existence of semantic priming for sign language and suggest that iconicity does not play a robust role in on-line lexical processing.

show abstract

Phonological priming in British Sign Language

Cited by 19 publications

References 0 publications

Between bodily action and conventionalized structure: The neural mechanisms of constructed action in sign language comprehension.

Between bodily action and conventionalized structure: The neural mechanisms of constructed action in sign language comprehension.

Semantic categorization: A comparison between deaf and hearing children

Effects of iconicity and semantic relatedness on lexical access in american sign language.

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About