Spoken Language Activation Alters Subsequent Sign Language Activation in L2 Learners of American Sign Language

Abstract

A large body of literature has characterized unimodal monolingual and bilingual lexicons and how neighborhood density affects lexical access; however there have been relatively fewer studies that generalize these findings to bimodal (M2) second language (L2) learners of sign languages. The goal of the current study was to investigate parallel language activation in M2L2 learners of sign language and to characterize the influence of spoken language and sign language neighborhood density on the activation of ASL signs. A priming paradigm was used in which the neighbors of the sign target were activated with a spoken English word and compared the activation of the targets in sparse and dense neighborhoods. Neighborhood density effects in auditory primed lexical decision task were then compared to previous reports of native deaf signers who were only processing sign language. Results indicated reversed neighborhood density effects in M2L2 learners relative to those in deaf signers such that there were inhibitory effects of handshape density and facilitatory effects of location density. Additionally, increased inhibition for signs in dense handshape neighborhoods was greater for high proficiency L2 learners. These findings support recent models of the hearing bimodal bilingual lexicon, which posit lateral links between spoken language and sign language lexical representations.

The Beneficial Role of L1 Spoken Language Skills on Initial L2 Sign Language Learning

“…This study extends previous studies that have shown positive effects of proficient sign language knowledge on the acquisition of written English (e.g., Mayberry, Del Giudice, & Lieberman, 2011). Additionally, the present results show an interdependence of two language modalities at the lexical level, which has been hypothesized previously by researchers studying the bimodal bilingual lexicon (Giezen & Emmorey, 2016; Shook & Marian, 2012; Williams & Newman, 2016a, in press).…”

“…A vocabulary test from Williams and Newman (in press) was used to capture growth in ASL lexical knowledge. This variable was obtained by administering an ASL vocabulary test twice, once before ASL instruction (T0) and again after one semester of instruction (T1).…”

Raising Handshape Awareness

“…Previous studies on M2L2 adult learners have shown that they do transfer gestural handshapes in spoken language to sign language (i.e., transfer phonological information), for example, handshape between M1L1 (their spoken first language) and M2L2 (the sign language being learned) (see for example Chen Pichler, 2011;Chen Pichler & Koulidobrova, 2016;Williams & Newman, 2017;Beal, 2020;Marshall, Bel, Gulamani & Morgan, 2020). These handshapes come from gestures that co-occur with spoken language and are different from handshapes in lexical signs, leading to an incorrect production of the lexical sign, i.e., the sign YES in ASL made with "fist" handshape instead of using the S handshape (Chen Pichler & Koulidobrova, 2016).…”

Phonological Proximity in Costa Rican Sign Language

“…According to Williams et al [34], a bifurcation of neighborhood density based on sublexical features reveals perceptual differences for the form and location. They mention Carreiras et al [35], and their findings in lexical access of Spanish Sign Language and its density as perceived by the deaf.…”