Interlanguage dynamics and lexical networks in nonnative L2 signers of ASL: cross-modal rhyme priming

Abstract

This study investigated the structure of the bimodal bilingual lexicon. In the cross-modal priming task nonnative sign language learners heard an English word (e.g.,keys) and responded to the lexicality of a signed target: an underlying rhyme (e.g.,cheese) or a sign neighbor of that word (e.g.,paper). The results indicated that rhyme words were retrieved more quickly and the L2 neighbors were faster for beginner learners. An item analysis also indicated that semantics did not facilitate neighbor retrieval and high frequency signs were retrieved more quickly. The AX discrimination task showed that learners focus on handshape and movement parameters and discriminate equally. The interlanguage dynamics play an important role in which phonological parameters are used and the spread of activation over time. A nonselective, integrated model of the bimodal bilingual lexicon is proposed such that lateral connections are weakened over time and handshape parameter feeds most of the activation to neighboring signs as a function of system dynamics.

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

“…In the present study, M2L2 learners demonstrated parallel language activation as English auditory primes affected the activation patterns of ASL signs. Additionally, findings of parallel language activation contribute to the handful of studies that have found parallel language activation in perception (Shook and Marian 2012;Williams and Newman 2016a), production (Emmorey et al 2008;Giezen and Emmorey 2016;Van Hell et al 2009), and reading .…”

“…A composite of 0 indicates a naïve learner, 0.5 indicates an intermediate learner, and a 1 indicates a native-like learner. This score has been used previously and shown to be more sensitive to capturing proficiency (Williams and Newman 2016a). Composite proficiency scores for the ASL students ranged from 0.46 to 0.86 (mean = 0.612, SD = 0.123).…”

“…For native signers, location is identified early during sign perception with little error while handshape is identified later and has greater variability in its errors. Similar to native signers, bimodal bilinguals (and M2L2 learners of sign language) identify location with few errors in perception (Bochner et al 2011;Williams and Newman 2016a). Unlike native signers, bimodal bilinguals and M2L2 learners have higher error rates for handshape but perceive it early in sign recognition, relatively at the same time as location (Morford and Carlson 2011;Grosvald et al 2012;Morford et al 2008;Williams and Newman 2016b).…”

“…Specifically, it is interesting to explore how activation in a spoken language influences the activation of sign language given that they use the same mechanisms, but the relationships within neighborhoods differ. Hearing bimodal bilinguals (and M2L2 learners) show parallel language activation of both spoken and sign languages (Emmorey et al 2008;Giezen and Emmorey 2016;Shook and Marian 2012;Williams and Newman 2016a). The parallel activation of languages in two different modalities influences activation in a unique way.…”

“…The parallel activation of languages in two different modalities influences activation in a unique way. Williams and Newman (2016a) demonstrated in a crossmodal priming task that activation spreads from a spoken lexical item (e.g., keys, /kiz/) to its spoken neighbor (e.g., cheese,/tSiz/), then to its sign equivalent (e.g., cheese) and further to its phonologically-related second language (L2) sign neighbor (e.g., paper) in bimodal bilinguals, suggesting that lateral links (e.g., the theoretical connection between cheese and cheese) between spoken and sign lexical items allow for cross-modal identity activation. Essentially, there is concomitant activation of semantically equivalent (i.e., identity) lexical items such that the activation of keys also activates its identity sign keys.…”