scholarly journals Brazilian Bimodal Bilinguals as Heritage Signers

Languages ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 3 (3) ◽  
pp. 32
Author(s):  
Ronice Quadros ◽  
Diane Lillo-Martin
Keyword(s):  
Sign Language ◽  
Language Production ◽  
Heritage Language ◽  
Spoken Language ◽  
Production Data ◽  
Language Fluency ◽  
Heritage Speakers ◽  
Deaf Parents ◽  
Hearing Children ◽  
Theoretical Issues

This paper presents an analysis of heritage signers: bimodal bilinguals, who are adult hearing children of Deaf parents who acquired sign language at home with their parents and the spoken language from the surrounding community. Analyzing heritage language with bimodal bilinguals who possess pairs of languages in different modalities provides a new kind of evidence for understanding the heritage language phenomenon as well as for theoretical issues regarding human language. Language production data were collected from four Brazilian bimodal bilinguals separately in both sign and speech, as well as from monolingual comparison Deaf signers and hearing speakers. The data were subsequently analyzed for various grammatical components. As with other types of heritage speakers, we observed a great degree of individual variation in the sign (heritage) language of balanced participants who patterned similarly to the monolingual signers, compared to those whose use of sign language differed greatly from monolinguals. One participant showed some weaknesses in the second (spoken) language. We approach the variation in language fluency in the two languages by considering the different contexts of language development and continuing use.

Use of code-mixing by young hearing children of Deaf parents

2016 ◽  
Vol 20 (5) ◽  
pp. 947-964 ◽  
Author(s):  
LAURA KANTO ◽  
MARJA-LEENA LAAKSO ◽  
KERTTU HUTTUNEN
Keyword(s):  
Language Development ◽  
Sign Language ◽  
Spoken Language ◽  
Pragmatic Development ◽  
Simultaneous Production ◽  
Code Mixing ◽  
Deaf Parents ◽  
Hearing Children

In this study we followed the characteristics and use of code-mixing by eight KODAs – hearing children of Deaf parents – from the age of 12 to 36 months. The children's interaction was video-recorded twice a year during three different play sessions: with their Deaf parent, with the Deaf parent and a hearing adult, and with the hearing adult alone. Additionally, data were collected on the children's overall language development in both sign language and spoken language. Our results showed that the children preferred to produce code-blends – simultaneous production of semantically congruent signs and words – in a way that was in accordance with the morphosyntactic structure of both languages being acquired. A Deaf parent as the interlocutor increased the number of and affected the type of code-blended utterances. These findings suggest that code-mixing in young bimodal bilingual KODA children can be highly systematic and synchronised in nature and can indicate pragmatic development.

Differentiation in language and gesture use during early bilingual development of hearing children of Deaf parents

2014 ◽  
Vol 18 (4) ◽  
pp. 769-788 ◽  
Author(s):  
LAURA KANTO ◽  
MARJA-LEENA LAAKSO ◽  
KERTTU HUTTUNEN
Keyword(s):  
Sign Language ◽  
Language Use ◽  
Spoken Language ◽  
Bilingual Children ◽  
Language Differentiation ◽  
Deaf Parents ◽  
New Knowledge ◽  
Structural Differences ◽  
Hearing Children ◽  
Early Phases

Hearing children of Deaf parents simultaneously acquire sign language and spoken language, which have many structural differences and represent two different modalities. We video-recorded eight children every six months between the ages of 12 and 24 months during three different play sessions: with their Deaf parent, with the Deaf parent and a hearing adult, and with a hearing adult alone. Additionally, we collected data on their vocabulary development in both sign language and spoken language. Children as young as 12 months old accommodated their language use according to the language(s) of their interlocutor(s). Additionally, the children used a manual modality that included gestures more frequently and in a more diverse way when interacting with their Deaf parent than with a hearing person. These findings bring new knowledge about language differentiation and gesture use of bilingual children during the early phases of language acquisition.

Language Intervention With a Child With Hearing Whose Parents Are Deaf

1995 ◽  
Vol 4 (4) ◽  
pp. 15-21 ◽  
Author(s):  
Brenda C. Seal ◽  
Lisa A. Hammett
Keyword(s):  
Language Acquisition ◽  
Sign Language ◽  
Intervention Program ◽  
Spoken Language ◽  
Significant Delay ◽  
Home Based ◽  
Deaf Parents ◽  
Home Based Intervention ◽  
Hearing Children

Literature concerning language acquisition in hearing children of deaf parents provides clinicians with a variety of case studies. Some of these studies found that language acquisition progressed in both sign language and spoken language without delay or disorder; others indicate concerns, especially in the development of spoken language. This case study describes an intervention program with a 20-month-old hearing child whose parents are deaf. The child was diagnosed as having a significant delay in both spoken and sign language. The home-based intervention program is described and the results are discussed, with implications for similar programming.

Establishing a Bimodal Bilingual Co-Enrollment Program in Germany: Preconditions, Policy, and Preliminary Data

2019 ◽  
pp. 149-164
Author(s):  
Johannes Hennies ◽  
Kristin Hennies
Keyword(s):  
Sign Language ◽  
Hard Of Hearing ◽  
Preliminary Data ◽  
Spoken Language ◽  
The Political ◽  
Bilingual Programs ◽  
Regular School ◽  
Schools For The Deaf ◽  
Hearing Children

In 2016, the first German bimodal bilingual co-enrollment program for deaf and hard-of-hearing (DHH) students, CODAs, and other hearing children was established in Erfurt, Thuringia. There is a tradition of different models of co-enrollment for DHH children in a spoken language setting in Germany, but there has been no permanent program for co-enrollment of DHH children who use sign language so far. This program draws from the experience of an existing model in Austria to enroll a group of DHH children using sign language in a regular school and from two well-documented bimodal bilingual programs in German schools for the deaf. The chapter describes the preconditions for the project, the political circumstances of the establishment of bimodal bilingual co-enrollment, and the factors that seem crucial for successful realization.

Correlations between linguistic change and linguistic performance among heritage speakers of Danish in Argentina

2019 ◽  
Vol 10 (5) ◽  
pp. 690-727 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jan Heegård Petersen ◽  
Gert Foget Hansen ◽  
Jacob Thøgersen
Keyword(s):  
Language Production ◽  
Heritage Language ◽  
Speech Rate ◽  
Structural Features ◽  
Lexical Retrieval ◽  
Linguistic Features ◽  
Heritage Speakers ◽  
Linguistic System ◽  
And Performance ◽  
Heritage Language Speakers

Abstract The article addresses the issue of an assumed correlation between heritage language speakers’ linguistic system and their fluency. Previous research has shown that heritage language speakers who have grammatical patterns that are divergent from the language spoken in the homeland also have lexical retrieval problems and speak with a slower speech rate. We approach the issue by examining two linguistic features and 11 different fluency features (‘structural’ and ‘performance features’) of 10 speakers of Argentine Heritage Danish. A factor analysis shows that the 11 performance features can be reduced to 2 factors that characterize the speakers ‘lexical retrieval’ and ‘fluency’. A correlation analysis with the two structural features, weakening of a phonological contrast between /oː/ and /ɔː/ and simplification of the gender system, shows that there are no correlations at all between these two measures of the speakers’ language production, in contrast to what previous research has found.

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).

scholarly journals Bilingualism and bimodal code-blending among deaf ASL-English bilinguals

2017 ◽  
Vol 2 ◽  
pp. 14 ◽  
Author(s):  
Marjorie Herbert ◽  
Acrisio Pires
Keyword(s):  
Language Acquisition ◽  
American Sign Language ◽  
Sign Language ◽  
Spoken Language ◽  
Production Data ◽  
Deaf Community ◽  
American Sign ◽  
Mixed Language ◽  
Delayed Exposure

The audiologically deaf members of the American Deaf community display bilingual competence in American Sign Language (ASL) and English, although their language acquisition trajectories often involve delayed exposure to one or both languages. There is a great deal of variation in terms of production among these signers, ranging from very ASL-typical to productions that seem to display heavy English influence. The latter, mixed productions, coined “Contact Signing” by Lucas & Valli (1992), could be representative of a type of codeswitching, referred to as ‘code-blending’ in sign language-spoken language contexts (e.g. Baker & Van den Bogaerde 2008), in which bilinguals invoke knowledge of their two grammars in concert, or these productions could be more like a mixed language, in which a third grammar, distinct from both ASL and English, constrains them. We argue, based on the analysis of our corpus of naturalistic data collected in an all-deaf sociolinguistic environment, that Contact Signing provides evidence for code-blending, given the distribution of English vs. ASL-based language properties in the production data from the participants in our study.

The Impact of Aging on Spatial Abilities in Deaf Users of a Sign Language

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Stéphanie Luna ◽  
Sven Joubert ◽  
Marion Blondel ◽  
Carlo Cecchetto ◽  
Jean-Pierre Gagné
Keyword(s):  
Sign Language ◽  
Cognitive Processing ◽  
Cognitive Processes ◽  
Language Production ◽  
Spoken Language ◽  
Spatial Abilities ◽  
Age Related ◽  
Spatial Tasks ◽  
Physical Changes ◽  
The Impact

Abstract Research involving the general population of people who use a spoken language to communicate has demonstrated that older adults experience cognitive and physical changes associated with aging. Notwithstanding the differences in the cognitive processes involved in sign and spoken languages, it is possible that aging can also affect cognitive processing in deaf signers. This research aims to explore the impact of aging on spatial abilities among sign language users. Results showed that younger signers were more accurate than older signers on all spatial tasks. Therefore, the age-related impact on spatial abilities found in the older hearing population can be generalized to the population of signers. Potential implications for sign language production and comprehension are discussed.

Aspecten in de Gebarentaalontwikkeling van Dove Kinderen van Dove en Horende Ouders

1995 ◽  
Vol 53 ◽  
pp. 61-69
Author(s):  
Carola Rooijmans
Keyword(s):  
Sign Language ◽  
Language Production ◽  
Deaf Child ◽  
Observational Research ◽  
Deaf Children ◽  
Sign Languages ◽  
Hearing Parents ◽  
Deaf Parents ◽  
School For The Deaf ◽  
Mean Length Of Utterance

Research has shown parallels in the development of linguistic aspects found in sign languages and spoken languages when acquired as a first language (Newport & Meier, 1985). Deaf children of deaf parents (DCDP) are exposed to sign language early and are able to acquire it effortlessly. However, only about 10% of deaf children have deaf parents. More commonly the deaf child is born into a hearing family. These hearing parents usually use a communication system in which spoken words are supported simultaneously with signs. Such a sign system differs considerably from a sign language as it is not a natural language. Deaf children of hearing parents (DCHP) come into contact with sign language when they go to a school for the deaf. Research indicates that DCHP do acquire sign language structures, but this acquisition is delayed (Knoors, 1992). In this study a description of the development of morpho-syntactic and lexical aspects of the Sign Language of the Netherlands is given. The sign language production of three DCDP is analysed every six months from 1;0 to 3;6. Furthermore, the sign language production of three DCHP at the age of 3;6 is compared with that of the DCDP at the same age. The study includes both general measures such as Mean Length of Utterance and Type/Token Ratio and aspects specific to sign languages such as the use of POINTS in two sign combinations. Recommendations will be made with respect to the improvement of observational research on language acquision of DCDP and DCHP.

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).

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document