Benjamin Bahan

Ethics of cochlear implantation in young children: A review and reply from a Deaf-World perspective ☆ ☆☆ ★

This article examines ethical dilemmas related to cochlear implant surgery in children. These dilemmas arise from the existence of a linguistic and cultural minority called the Deaf World. Organizations of culturally Deaf adults in the United States and abroad, as well as the World Federation of the Deaf, have, on ethical grounds, strongly criticized the practice of cochlear implant surgery in children. Three ethical dilemmas are examined. (1) The surgery is of unproven value for the main significant benefit sought, language acquisition, whereas the psychological, social, and linguistic risks have not been assessed. Thus the surgery appears to be innovative, but innovative surgery on children is ethically problematic. (2) It is now widely recognized that the signed languages of the world are full-fledged natural languages, and the communities that speak those languages have distinct social organizations and cultures. Deaf culture values lead to a different assessment of pediatric cochlear implant surgery than do mainstream (hearing) values, and both sets of values have standing. (3) The fields of otology and audiology want to provide cochlear implants to Deaf children but also, their leaders say, want to protect Deaf culture; those appear to be conflicting goals in principle because, if there were perfect implants, the ranks of the Deaf World would diminish.

Clausal Structure and a Tier for Grammatical Marking in American Sign Language

Grammatical information in ASL can systematically be marked on the face. Such nonmanual marking extends over the c-command domain of the trigger, and therefore provides information about the hierarchical organization of the language. Consistent with evidence available from the distribution of non-manual markings—as illustrated with respect to wh-marking and negation—a basic clausal structure for ASL is proposed. Furthermore, we suggest, contrary to generally accepted claims about ASL, that both Tense and Agreement are structurally present in all ASL main clauses. This analysis allows for a uniform account of the licensing of null subjects in ASL. Evidence in favor of this analysis, and against a dual licensing mechanism (as proposed in Kegl, 1985, and Lillo-Martin, 1986, 1991b), is presented.

The Licensing of Null Arguments in American Sign Language

The distribution of null arguments across languages has been accounted for in terms of two distinct strategies: licensing by agreement and licensing by topic. Lillo-Martin (1986, 1991) claims that American Sign Language (ASL) exploits both strategies for licensing null arguments, depending on the morphological characteristics of the verb. Here we show that this is incorrect. Once the nonmanual correlates of agreement features (comparable to the nonmanual expressions of other syntactic features) in ASL are recognized, it becomes apparent that null arguments in this language are systematically licensed by an expression of syntactic agreement.

Realizations of syntactic agreement in American sign language : Similarities between the clause and the noun phrase

ASL syntax makes essential use of specific non-manual expressions of syntactic features (e.g., +neg, +wh) that co-occur with manual signs. These markings occur obligatorily with manual material contained in the node of origin and optionally extend over the c-command domain of that node, thus providing important evidence for hierarchical structure. In this article, we show that agreement features, both within the clause and the noun phrase, also have non-manual correlates that exhibit the predicted distribution. Interestingly, transitive IPs and possessive DPs pattern together in their manifestation of agreement marking, while intransitive IPs pattern with non-possessive DPs.

THE RIGHTWARD ANALYSIS OF WH-MOVEMENT IN ASL : A REPLY TO PETRONIO AND LILLO-MARTIN

Neidle, Kegl, Bahan, Aarons, & MacLaughlin 1997 argues that rightward WHmovement in ASL constitutes a counterexample to claims by Kayne (1994) that all phrasal projections exhibit specifier-head-complement order and that syntactic movement is leftward. Petronio & Lillo-Martin 1997, although not adopting Kaynes antisymmetry framework, offers a critique of our analysis and a proposal involving leftward wH-movement. Here, we argue that Petronio and Lillo-Martins interpretations of the data are incorrect and that their analysis cannot account for the facts of the language. We therefore maintain our position that ASL WHphrases move rightward in ASL, and that universal grammar must allow the option of rightward movement.*