Emergent Morphology in Child Homesign: Evidence from Number Language

Abstract

Human languages, signed and spoken, can be characterized by the structural patterns they use to associate communicative forms with meanings. One such pattern is paradigmatic morphology, where complex words are built from the systematic use and re-use of sub-lexical units. Here, we provide evidence of emergent paradigmatic morphology akin to number inflection in a communication system developed without input from a conventional language, homesign. We study the communication systems of four deaf child homesigners (mean age 8;02). Although these idiosyncratic systems vary from one another, we nevertheless find that all four children use handshape and movement devices productively to express cardinal and noncardinal number information, and that their number expressions are consistent in both form and meaning. Our study shows, for the first time, that all four homesigners not only incorporate number devices into representational devices used as predicates , but also into gestures functioning as nominals, including deictic gestures. In other words, the homesigners express number by systematically combining and re-combining additive markers for number (qua inflectional morphemes) with representational and deictic gestures (qua bases). The creation of new, complex forms with predictable meanings across gesture types and linguistic functions constitutes evidence for an inflectional morphological paradigm in homesign and expands our understanding of the structural patterns of language that are, and are not, dependent on linguistic input.

Cripping the “Delay”: Multilingualism-Related Consequences of Re-Labeling Language Deprivation Systems

“…These creations have attracted a great deal of research attention but from two very distinct perspectives that appear contradictory. On one hand are descriptions of homesign systems displaying an impressively sophisticated array of language-like features that are innovated by DHH children in the absence of usable linguistic input (Goldin-Meadow 2012;Carrigan and Coppola 2017;Flaherty et al, 2021;Abner et al, 2021). On the other hand are reports of poor language outcomes for DHH adults who experienced delayed exposure to a conventional sign language; these outcomes are attributed to an initial communication system that was too impoverished to fully support subsequent language development in either modality (Mayberry and Eichen, 1991;Deng and Tong 2021).…”

The Acquisition of Strategies to Express Plurality in Hearing Second Language Learners of Sign Language of the Netherlands

“…One could argue that reduplication of a language element, in this case a noun, is iconic in the sense that "more of the same form" corresponds to "more of the same meaning" (Kouwenberg & LaCharité, 2001, p. 60). This general principle of conceptualization explains the presence of plural reduplication in signed and spoken language, as well as the repetitive use of gestures to express plural, as exemplified by several authors (e.g., Abner et al, 2022;Bressem, 2012;Horton et al, 2015) for several groups of gesturers (see Gestures section). If one begins with the assumption that reduplication rests upon a universal principle crosscutting modalities, it is not surprising that the learners picked up this strategy fast.…”

“…All studies report that participants use their hands to denote multiple objects. Some of the creative learner solutions displayed in Figure 10 resemble the solutions presented by the participants in Janke and Marshall (2017) and Abner et al (2022), such as the use of a numeral in which each finger represents an object (Figure 10f, right), described by Janke and Marshall (2017) as "simultaneous representation," and the use of numeral-incorporated pointing signs (Figure 10h) reported in Abner et al (2022).…”

“…Goldin-Meadow and Mylander (1990) found a deaf home-signer aged 3;11 employing a handshape with spread fingers to refer to "many small particles or an object with individual parts" (p. 171), such as the spokes of an umbrella. Abner et al (2022) identified various strategies to express plurality in four child home-signers (aged 7;3-9;10): (i) the use of n extended fingers to refer to the number of objects, (ii) incorporation of n extended fingers into a gesture (i.e., the use of a 4-handshape to express four flowers growing), (iii) repetition of the movement, and (iv) pointing gestures (repeated points, sweeps, or points with n extended fingers to refer to the number of objects). Regarding (iii), Horton et al (2015) found that both adult home-signers and silent gesturers use repetition of movement to refer to a set of stationary objects in particular configurations.…”

“…Abner et al. (2022) identified various strategies to express plurality in four child home‐signers (aged 7;3–9;10): (i) the use of n extended fingers to refer to the number of objects, (ii) incorporation of n extended fingers into a gesture (i.e., the use of a 4‐handshape to express four flowers growing), (iii) repetition of the movement, and (iv) pointing gestures (repeated points, sweeps, or points with n extended fingers to refer to the number of objects). Regarding (iii), Horton et al.…”