Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-rcrh6 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-28T23:46:20.108Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

THE BENEFICIAL ROLE OF L1 SPOKEN LANGUAGE SKILLS ON INITIAL L2 SIGN LANGUAGE LEARNING

Cognitive and Linguistic Predictors of M2L2 Acquisition

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  22 September 2016

Joshua T. Williams Open the ORCID record for Joshua T. Williams [Opens in a new window] ,
Isabelle Darcy  and
Sharlene D. Newman
Joshua T. Williams*
Affiliation:
Indiana University
Isabelle Darcy
Affiliation:
Indiana University
Sharlene D. Newman
Affiliation:
Indiana University
*
*Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to Joshua T. Williams, Cognitive Neuroimaging Laboratory, Indiana University, 1101 E. 10th Street, Bloomington, IN, 47405. E-mail: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Understanding how language modality (i.e., signed vs. spoken) affects second language outcomes in hearing adults is important both theoretically and pedagogically, as it can determine the specificity of second language (L2) theory and inform how best to teach a language that uses a new modality. The present study investigated which cognitive-linguistic skills predict successful L2 sign language acquisition. A group (n = 25) of adult hearing L2 learners of American Sign Language underwent a cognitive-linguistic test battery before and after one semester of sign language instruction. A number of cognitive-linguistic measures of verbal memory, phonetic categorization skills, and vocabulary knowledge were examined to determine whether they predicted proficiency in a multiple linear regression analysis. Results indicated that English vocabulary knowledge and phonetic categorization skills predicted both vocabulary growth and self-rated proficiency at the end of one semester of instruction. Memory skills did not significantly predict either proficiency measures. These results highlight how linguistic skills in the first language (L1) directly predict L2 learning outcomes regardless of differences in L1 and L2 language modalities.

Type
Research Reports
Information
Studies in Second Language Acquisition , Volume 39 , Issue 4 , December 2017 , pp. 833 - 850
Check for updates
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2016 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Footnotes

We would like to acknowledge the funding agencies that helped make this study possible, including the National Science Foundation Graduate Research Fellowship #1342962 (Williams) and Indiana University Imaging Research Facility Brain Scan Credit Program (Williams, Darcy, and Newman). We would like to thank two anonymous reviewers and the editorial board for constructive feedback on previous versions.

References

REFERENCES

Bachman, L. F., & Palmer, A. S. (1989). The construct validation of self-ratings of communicative language ability. Language Testing, 6, 14–29. doi: 10.1177/026553228900600104 Google Scholar
Baddeley, A. D., & Hitch, G. (1974). Working memory. Psychology of Learning and Motivation, 8, 47–89. doi: 10.1016/S0079-7421(08)60452-1 Google Scholar
Bickford, J. A., & Fraychineaud, K. (2006). Mouth morphemes in ASL: A closer look. Paper presented at the Ninth Theoretical Issues in Sign Language Research Conference, Florianopolis, Brazil.Google Scholar
Blom, E., Paradis, J., & Duncan, T. S. (2012). Effects of input properties, vocabulary size, and L1 on the development of third person singular–s in child L2 English. Language Learning, 62, 965–994. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-9922.2012.00715.x Google Scholar
Boyes-Braem, P., Sutton-Spence, R., & Leiden, R. (Eds.). (2001). The hands are the head of the mouth: The mouth as articulator in sign languages. Washington, DC: Gallaudet University Press.Google Scholar
Capek, C., Campbell, R., & Woll, B. (2008). The bimodal bilingual brain: fMRI investigations concerning the cortical distribution and differentiation of signed language and speechreading. Rivista di Psicolinguistica Applicata, 3, 97–112.Google Scholar
Chen Pichler, D., & Koulidobrova, H. (2015). Acquisition of sign language as a second language. In Marschark, M. & Spencer, P. E. (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of deaf studies in language (pp. 218–229). New York, NY: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Christoffels, I. K., & De Groot, A. (2004). Components of simultaneous interpreting: Comparing interpreting with shadowing and paraphrasing. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 7, 227–240. doi: 10.1017/S1366728904001609 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Corina, D., Chiu, Y. S., Knapp, H., Greenwald, R., San Jose-Robertson, L., and Braun, A. (2007). Neural correlates of human action observation in hearing and deaf subjects. Journal of Brain Research, 1152, 111–129. doi: 10.1016/j.brainres.2007.03.054 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Cummins, J. (1979). Linguistic interdependence and the educational development of bilingual children. Review of Educational Research, 49, 222–251. doi: 10.3102/00346543049002222 Google Scholar
Daniels, M. (1993). ASL as a factor in acquiring English. Sign Language Studies, 78, 23–29. doi: 10.1353/sls.1993.0013 Google Scholar
Davis, J. (1990). Linguistic transference and interference: Interpreting between English and ASL. In Lucas, C. (Ed.), Sign language research: Theoretical issues (pp. 308–321). Washington, DC: Gallaudet University Press.Google Scholar
Dunn, L. M., & Dunn, L. M. (1997). PPVT-III: Peabody picture vocabulary test. Circle Pines, MN: American Guidance Service.Google Scholar
Emmorey, K., Thompson, R., & Colvin, R. (2009). Eye gaze during comprehension of American Sign Language by native and beginning signers. Journal of Deaf Studies and Deaf Education, 14, 237–243. doi: 10.1093/deafed/enn037 Google Scholar
Emmorey, K., Borinstein, H. B., Thompson, R., & Gollan, T. H. (2008). Bimodal bilingualism. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 11, 43–61. doi: 10.1017/S1366728907003203 Google Scholar
Emmorey, K., Xu, J., Gannon, P., Goldin-Meadow, S., & Braun, A. (2010). CNS activation and regional connectivity during pantomime observation: No engagement of the mirror neuron system for deaf signers. Neuroimage, 49, 994–1005. doi: 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2009.08.001 Google Scholar
Geer, L. (2016). Teaching ASL fingerspelling to second-language learners: Explicit versus implicit phonetic training (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Austin: University of Texas.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Geva, E., & Ryan, E. B. (1993). Linguistic and cognitive correlates of academic skills in first and second languages. Language Learning, 43, 5–42. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-1770.1993.tb00171.x Google Scholar
Giezen, M. R., & Emmorey, K. (2016). Language co-activation and lexical selection in bimodal bilinguals: Evidence from picture–word interference. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 19, 264–276. doi: 10.1017/S1366728915000097 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hirshorn, E. A., Fernandez, N. M., & Bavelier, D. (2012). Routes to short-term memory indexing: Lessons from deaf native users of American Sign Language. Cognitive Neuropsychology, 29, 85–103. doi: 10.1080/02643294.2012.704354 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hodáková, S. (2009). Memory in simultaneous and consecutive interpreting (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Nitra: Konštantín Filozof University.Google Scholar
Lervåg, A., & Aukrust, V. G. (2010). Vocabulary knowledge is a critical determinant of the difference in reading comprehension growth between first and second language learners. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 51, 612–620. doi: 10.1111/j.1469-7610.2009.02185.x Google Scholar
Linck, J. A., Hoshino, N., & Kroll, J. F. (2008). Cross-language lexical processes and inhibitory control. The Mental Lexicon, 3, 349. doi: 10.1075/ml.3.3.06lin CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Linck, J. A., Osthus, P., Koeth, J. T., & Bunting, M. F. (2014). Working memory and second language comprehension and production: A meta-analysis. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 21, 861–883. doi: 10.3758/s13423-013-0565-2 Google Scholar
López Gómez, M. J., Bajo Molina, T., Padilla Benítez, P., & Santiago de Torres, J. (2007). Predicting proficiency in signed language interpreting: A preliminary study. Interpreting, 9, 71–93. doi: 10.1075/intp.9.1.05lop CrossRefGoogle Scholar
MacIntyre, P. D., Noels, K. A., & Clément, R. (1997). Biases in self-ratings of second language proficiency: The role of language anxiety. Language Learning, 47, 265–287. doi: 10.1111/0023-8333.81997008 Google Scholar
Mayberry, R. I., Del Giudice, A. A., & Lieberman, A. M. (2011). Reading achievement in relation to phonological coding and awareness in deaf readers: A meta-analysis. Journal of Deaf Studies and Deaf Education, 16, 164–188. doi: 10.1093/deafed/enq049 Google Scholar
McBride-Chang, C., Cheung, H., Chow, B. Y., Chow, C. L., & Choi, L. (2006). Metalinguistic skills and vocabulary knowledge in Chinese (L1) and English (L2). Reading and Writing, 19, 695–716. doi: 10.1007/s11145-005-5742-x Google Scholar
Michael, E., & Gollan, T. H. (2005). Being and becoming bilingual: Individual differences and consequences for language production. In Kroll, J. F. & De Groot, A. M. B. (Eds.), Handbook of bilingualism: Psycholinguistic approaches (pp. 389–407). New York, NY: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Miralpeix, I. (2012). X_Lex and Y_Lex: A validation study. Paper presented at the 22nd VARG Conference, Newtown, UK, Vocabulary Acquisition Research Group.Google Scholar
Miyake, A., & Friedman, N. P. (1998). Individual differences in second language proficiency: Working memory as language aptitude. In Healy, A. F. and Bourne, L. E. (Eds.), Foreign language learning: Psycholinguistic studies on training and retention (pp. 339–364). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
Peirce, J. W. (2007). PsychoPy—Psychophysics software in Python. Journal of Neuroscience Methods, 162, 8–13. doi: 10.1016/j.jneumeth.2006.11.017 Google Scholar
Proctor, C. P., August, D., Carlo, M. S., & Snow, C. (2006). The intriguing role of Spanish language vocabulary knowledge in predicting English reading comprehension. Journal of Educational Psychology, 98, 159. doi: 10.1037/0022-0663.98.1.159 Google Scholar
Rosen, R. S. (2015). Learning American Sign Language in high school: Motivation, strategies, and achievement. Washington, DC: Gallaudet University Press.Google Scholar
Sandler, W., & Lillo-Martin, D. (2006). Sign Language and linguistic universals. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Shook, A., & Marian, V. (2012). Bimodal bilinguals co-activate both languages during spoken comprehension. Cognition, 124, 314–324. doi: 10.1016/j.cognition.2012.05.014 Google Scholar
Singleton, J. L., Morgan, D., DiGello, E., Wiles, J., & Rivers, R. (2004). Vocabulary use by low, moderate, and high ASL-proficient writers compared to hearing ESL and monolingual speakers. Journal of Deaf Studies and Deaf Education, 9, 86–103. doi: 10.1093/deafed/enh011 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Smith, C., Lentz, E. M., & Mikos, K. (1988a). Signing naturally Level 1. San Diego, CA: DawnSignPress.Google Scholar
Smith, C., Lentz, E. M., & Mikos, K. (1988b). Signing naturally Level 2. San Diego, CA: DawnSignPress.Google Scholar
Smith, C., Lentz, E. M., & Mikos, K. (2008). Signing naturally. San Diego, CA: DawnSignPress.Google Scholar
Sparks, R., Patton, J., Ganschow, L., & Humbach, N. (2009). Long-term crosslinguistic transfer of skills from L1 to L2. Language Learning, 59, 203–243. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-9922.2009.00504.x Google Scholar
Stavrakaki, S., Megari, K., Kosmidis, M. H., Apostolidou, M., & Takou, E. (2012). Working memory and verbal fluency in simultaneous interpreters. Journal of Clinical and Experimental Neuropsychology, 34, 624–633. doi: 10.1080/13803395.2012.667068 Google Scholar
Tzou, Y. Z., Eslami, Z. R., Chen, H. C., & Vaid, J. (2011). Effect of language proficiency and degree of formal training in simultaneous interpreting on working memory and interpreting performance: Evidence from Mandarin–English speakers. International Journal of Bilingualism, 16, 213–227. doi: 10.1177/1367006911403197 Google Scholar
Welles, E. B. (2004). Foreign language enrollments in United States institutions of higher education. ADFL Bulletin, 35, 1–20. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/25595784.Google Scholar
Williams, J. T., & Darcy, I., & Newman, S. D. (2015a). Second language working memory deficits and plasticity in hearing bimodal learners of sign language. Psychology of Language & Communication, 19, 128–148. doi: 10.1515/plc-2015-0008 Google Scholar
Williams, J. T., Darcy, I., & Newman, S. D. (2015b). Modality-independent neural mechanisms for novel phonetic processing. Brain Research, 1620, 107–115. doi: 10.1016/j.brainres.2015.05.014 Google Scholar
Williams, J. T., Darcy, I., Newman, S. D. (2016a). Bimodal bilingualism as multisensory training? Evidence for improved audiovisual speech perception after sign language exposure. Brain Research, 1633, 101–110. doi: 10.1016/j.brainres.2015.12.046 Google Scholar
Williams, J. T., Darcy, I., Newman, S. D. (2016b). Modality-specific processing precedes amodal linguistic processing during L2 sign language acquisition: A longitudinal study. Cortex, 75, 56–67. doi: 10.1016/j.cortex.2015.11.015 Google Scholar
Williams, J. T., & Newman, S. D. (2016a). Interlanguage dynamics and lexical networks in nonnative L2 signers of ASL: Cross-modal rhyme priming. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 19, 453–470. doi: 10.1017/S136672891500019X CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Williams, J. T., & Newman, S. D. (2016b). Impacts of visual sonority and handshape markedness on second language learning of American Sign Language. Journal of Deaf Studies and Deaf Education, 21, 171–186. doi: 10.1093/deafed/env055 Google Scholar
Williams, J. T., & Newman, S. D. (2016). Spoken language activation alters subsequent sign language activation in L2 learners of American Sign Language. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research. Advanced online publication. doi: 10.1007/s10936-016-9432-4 Google Scholar
Ye, Z., & Zhou, X. (2009). Executive control in language processing. Neuroscience & Biobehavioral Reviews, 33, 1168–1177. doi: 10.1016/j.neubiorev.2009.03.003 Google Scholar