Gerardo Ortega

Type of iconicity matters in the vocabulary development of signing children

Recent research on signed as well as spoken language shows that the iconic features of the target language might play a role in language development. Here, we ask further whether different types of iconic depictions modulate children’s preferences for certain types of sign-referent links during vocabulary development in sign language. Results from a picture description task indicate that lexical signs with 2 possible variants are used in different proportions by deaf signers from different age groups. While preschool and school-age children favored variants representing actions associated with their referent (e.g., a writing hand for the sign PEN), adults preferred variants representing the perceptual features of those objects (e.g., upward index finger representing a thin, elongated object for the sign PEN). Deaf parents interacting with their children, however, used action- and perceptual-based variants in equal proportion and favored action variants more than adults signing to other adults. We propose that when children are confronted with 2 variants for the same concept, they initially prefer action-based variants because they give them the opportunity to link a linguistic label to familiar schemas linked to their action/motor experiences. Our results echo findings showing a bias for action-based depictions in the development of iconic co-speech gestures suggesting a modality bias for such representations during development.

Input Processing at First Exposure to a Sign Language.

There is growing interest in learners’ cognitive capacities to process a second language (L2) at first exposure to the target language. Evidence suggests that L2 learners are capable of processing novel words by exploiting phonological information from their first language (L1). Hearing adult learners of a sign language, however, cannot fall back on their L1 to process novel signs because the modality differences between speech (aural–oral) and sign (visual-manual) do not allow for direct cross-linguistic influence. Sign language learners might use alternative strategies to process input expressed in the manual channel. Learners may rely on iconicity, the direct relationship between a sign and its referent. Evidence up to now has shown that iconicity facilitates learning in non-signers, but it is unclear whether it also facilitates sign production. In order to fill this gap, the present study investigated how iconicity influenced articulation of the phonological components of signs. In Study 1, hearing non-signers viewed a set of iconic and arbitrary signs along with their English translations and repeated the signs as accurately as possible immediately after. The results show that participants imitated iconic signs significantly less accurately than arbitrary signs. In Study 2, a second group of hearing non-signers imitated the same set of signs but without the accompanying English translations. The same lower accuracy for iconic signs was observed. We argue that learners rely on iconicity to process manual input because it brings familiarity to the target (sign) language. However, this reliance comes at a cost as it leads to a more superficial processing of the signs’ full phonetic form. The present findings add to our understanding of learners’ cognitive capacities at first exposure to a signed L2, and raises new theoretical questions in the field of second language acquisition.

Iconicity and sign lexical acquisition. A review

The study of iconicity, defined as the direct relationship between a linguistic form and its referent, has gained momentum in recent years across a wide range of disciplines. In the spoken modality, there is abundant evidence showing that iconicity is a key factor that facilitates language acquisition. However, when we look at sign languages, which excel in the prevalence of iconic structures, there is a more mixed picture, with some studies showing a positive effect and others showing a null or negative effect. In an attempt to reconcile the existing evidence the present review presents a critical overview of the literature on the acquisition of a sign language as first (L1) and second (L2) language and points at some factor that may be the source of disagreement. Regarding sign L1 acquisition, the contradicting findings may relate to iconicity being defined in a very broad sense when a more fine-grained operationalisation might reveal an effect in sign learning. Regarding sign L2 acquisition, evidence shows that there is a clear dissociation in the effect of iconicity in that it facilitates conceptual-semantic aspects of sign learning but hinders the acquisition of the exact phonological form of signs. It will be argued that when we consider the gradient nature of iconicity and that signs consist of a phonological form attached to a meaning we can discern how iconicity impacts sign learning in positive and negative ways.