Iconic gestures serve as manual cognates in hearing second language learners of a sign language: An ERP study.

Ortega, Gerardo; Özyürek, Aslı; Peeters, David

doi:10.1037/xlm0000729

Cited by 23 publications

(43 citation statements)

References 43 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Whether or not new M2L2 signers can try to capitalize on their gestural repertoire as a way to bootstrap learning a language in a visual modality has yet to be seen. Recent research has shown that hearing signers "generate expectations about the form of iconic signs never seen before based on their implicit knowledge of gestures" (Ortega et al 2019). It is still unclear whether ASL teachers could somehow leverage the knowledge of a gestural repertoire to teach constructed action or viewpoint constructions.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Constructed Action in American Sign Language: A Look at Second Language Learners in a Second Modality

2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Constructed action is a cover term used in signed language linguistics to describe multi-functional constructions which encode perspective-taking and viewpoint. Within constructed action, viewpoint constructions serve to create discourse coherence by allowing signers to share perspectives and psychological states. Character, observer, and blended viewpoint constructions have been well documented in signed language literature in Deaf signers. However, little is known about hearing second language learners’ use of constructed action or about the acquisition and use of viewpoint constructions. We investigate the acquisition of viewpoint constructions in 11 college students acquiring American Sign Language (ASL) as a second language in a second modality (M2L2). Participants viewed video clips from the cartoon Canary Row and were asked to “retell the story as if you were telling it to a deaf friend”. We analyzed the signed narratives for time spent in character, observer, and blended viewpoints. Our results show that despite predictions of an overall increase in use of all types of viewpoint constructions, students varied in their time spent in observer and character viewpoints, while blended viewpoint was rarely observed. We frame our preliminary findings within the context of M2L2 learning, briefly discussing how gestural strategies used in multimodal speech-gesture constructions may influence learning trajectories.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Constructed Action in American Sign Language: A Look at Second Language Learners in a Second Modality

2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…One important result coming out of this research is that L2 sign acquisition is affected by the iconicity of signs (e.g., Lieberth & Gamble, 1991; Campbell, Martin & White, 1992; Morett, 2015; Ortega, Özyürek & Peeters, 2019). Iconicity is a pervasive feature of many sign languages and is most often defined as the extent to which a sign resembles its meaning.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 97%

“…Such effects of gesture knowledge on the perception of sign meaning might be comparable to transfer effects that occur from L1 to L2 (e.g., MacWhinney, 1992). In fact, Ortega et al (2019) suggest that these iconic gestures function as “manual cognates” for hearing L2 learners of a sign language.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Cross-modal translation priming and iconicity effects in deaf signers and hearing learners of American Sign Language

Mott¹,

Midgley

Holcomb

et al. 2020

Bilingualism

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study used ERPs to a) assess the neural correlates of cross-linguistic, cross-modal translation priming in hearing beginning learners of American Sign Language (ASL) and deaf highly proficient signers and b) examine whether sign iconicity modulates these priming effects. Hearing learners exhibited translation priming for ASL signs preceded by English words (greater negativity for unrelated than translation primes) later in the ERP waveform than deaf signers and exhibited earlier and greater priming for iconic than non-iconic signs. Iconicity did not modulate translation priming effects either behaviorally or in the ERPs for deaf signers (except in a 800–1000 ms time window). Because deaf signers showed early translation priming effects (beginning at 400ms-600ms), we suggest that iconicity did not facilitate lexical access, but deaf signers may have recognized sign iconicity later in processing. Overall, the results indicate that iconicity speeds lexical access for L2 sign language learners, but not for proficient signers.

show abstract

“…We chose to use English pseudowords because we were concerned that participants would focus attention on unfamiliar features and this would either disrupt normal word learning processes (e.g., rehearsal) or would allow individuals to use unfamiliar features as cues (e.g., a word produced with a click would be distinguished from all others). We did not, however, have this same concern with sign stimuli because, to the non-signer, all sign features should be relatively unfamiliar except in the case of iconic signs (Ortega & Morgan, 2015;Ortega, Ozyurek, & Peeters, 2019), which we attempted to avoid. While this potential confound is a valid concern, we note that we did use Turkish in one of our word learning tasks and it showed similar relationships as our other word learning tasks.…”

Section: Limitationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Individual differences in lexical learning across two language modalities: Sign learning, word learning, and their relationship in hearing non-signing adults

Martinez

Singleton

2019

Acta Psychologica

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A considerable amount of research has been devoted to understanding individual differences in lexical learning, however, the majority of this research has been conducted with spoken languages rather than signed languages and thus we know very little about the cognitive processes involved in sign learning or the extent to which lexical learning processes are specific to word learning. The present study was conducted to address this gap. Two-hundred thirty-six non-signing adults completed 25 tasks assessing word learning and sign learning (via associative learning paradigms) as well as modality-specific phonological short-term memory, working memory capacity, crystallized intelligence, and fluid intelligence. Latent variable analyses indicated that, when other variables were held constant, fluid intelligence was predictive of both word and sign learning, however, modality-specific phonological short-term memory factors were only predictive of lexical learning within modality-none of the other variables made significant independent contributions. It was further observed that sign and word learning were strongly correlated. Exploratory analyses revealed that all lexical learning tasks loaded onto a general factor, however, sign learning tasks loaded onto an additional specific factor. As such, this study provides insight into the cognitive components that are common to associative L2 lexical learning regardless of language modality and those that are unique to either signed or spoken languages. Results are further discussed in light of established and more recent theories of intelligence, short-term memory, and working memory.

show abstract

Iconic gestures serve as manual cognates in hearing second language learners of a sign language: An ERP study.

Cited by 23 publications

References 43 publications

Constructed Action in American Sign Language: A Look at Second Language Learners in a Second Modality

Constructed Action in American Sign Language: A Look at Second Language Learners in a Second Modality

Cross-modal translation priming and iconicity effects in deaf signers and hearing learners of American Sign Language

Individual differences in lexical learning across two language modalities: Sign learning, word learning, and their relationship in hearing non-signing adults

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About