Language acquisition by deaf children

Language acquisition by deaf children parallels the development of any children acquiring spoken language as long as there is full access to language from birth. Despite limited access to spoken language, communication and language exposure are fundamental to deaf infants' general cognitive development and their engagement with their surroundings. While a growing number of deaf children in the developed world receive hearing aids and/or cochlear implants to support spoken language acquisition[1][2] there are Deaf communities around the world that use signed languages. Infants born to signing parents, or exposed immersively to fluent sign language models at a young age, generally acquire sign language natively.

Role of input and the environment

During the first year of life, all infants are primed to acquire information about the language in their environment.[3][4] Deaf infants immersed in fluent sign language from birth develop native language skills in that sign language in the same manner as any other child acquiring a language natively.[5][6][7] The early experience of deaf children, however, is highly variable and frequently atypical from a language acquisition perspective.[5] More than 95% of deaf children are born to hearing, non-signing families.[8] New parents with a deaf infant are faced with a range of options for how to interact with their newborn, and may try several methods that include different amounts of sign language, oral/auditory language training, and communicative codes invented to facilitate acquisition of spoken language.[9][10] In addition, parents may decide to use cochlear implants or hearing aids with their infants.[2] According to one US-based study from 2008, approximately 55% of eligible deaf infants received cochlear implants.[1] A study in Switzerland found that 80% of deaf infants were given cochlear implants as of 2006[11] and the numbers have been steadily increasing.[9] While cochlear implants provide auditory stimulation, not all children succeed at acquiring spoken language completely.[9] Children who received cochlear implants before twelve months old were found to be significantly more likely to perform at age-level standards for spoken language than children who received implants later.[12][13]

Deaf children born to deaf parents

About three percent of deaf children are born to two deaf parents, with one percent born to one hearing and one deaf parent.[8]:153, 155

Deaf children born to hearing parents

About 96% of deaf children are born to hearing parents.[8]:153, 155 The majority of these children receive hearing aids and/or cochlear implants, and are taught to listen and to use spoken language using these devices. Research shows that deaf children who listen and speak to communicate, but do not use sign language have better communication outcomes[14][15] and social well-being[16] than Deaf children who use sign language.

Early stages (birth to 12 months)

The general stages of language acquisition are the same whether the language is spoken or signed.[17] There are certain unique features of sign language acquisition due to the visual/manual modality and these differences can help to distinguish between universal aspects of language acquisition and aspects that may be affected by early experience.[17]

The very earliest linguistic tasks facing newborns are perceptual.[3] Babies need to determine what basic linguistic elements are used in their native language to create words (their phonetic inventory). They also need to determine how to segment the continuous stream of language input into phrases and eventually words.[13] From birth, they have an attraction to patterned linguistic input, which is evident whether the input is spoken or signed.[18][19][20] They use their sensitive perceptual skills to acquire information about the structure of their native language, particularly prosodic and phonological features.[3] Sign languages have natural prosodic patterns and infants are sensitive to these prosodic boundaries even if they have no specific experience with sign languages.[21] 6-month-old hearing infants with no sign experience also preferentially attend to sign language stimuli over complex gesture, indicating that they are perceiving sign language as meaningful linguistic input.[22] Since infants attend to spoken and signed language in a similar manner, several researchers have concluded that much of language acquisition is universal, not tied to the modality of the language, and that sign languages are acquired and processed very similarly to spoken languages, given adequate exposure.[19][20][23] At the same time, these and other researchers point out that there are many unknowns in terms of how a visual language might be processed differently than a spoken language, particularly given the unusual path of language transmission for most deaf infants.[23][24]

Research shows that Deaf parents with deaf infants are more successful than hearing parents at capturing moments of joint attention when signing, which are privileged language learning moments.[25] Deaf mothers are more adept at ensuring that the infant is visually engaged prior to signing[26] and use specific modifications to their signing, referred to as child-directed sign[27] to gain and maintain their children's attention. Just as in child-directed speech (CDS), child-directed signing is characterized by slower production, exaggerated prosody, and repetition.[27] Due to the unique demands of a visual language, child-directed signing also includes tactile strategies and relocation of language into the child's line of vision.[27][28]

Methods

Pedagogy

Language acquisition strategies for signing deaf children are different than those appropriate for hearing children, or for deaf children who successfully use hearing aids and/or cochlear implants. For parents with deaf children who do not use amplification (hearing aids or cochlear implants), joint attention (an important component to language development) can be problematic. Hearing children can watch their environment and listen to an adult comment on it. However, children who do not hear have to switch their visual attention back and forth between stimuli.

Strategies for nonverbal communication include using facial expressions and body language to show emotion and reinforce the child's attention to their caregiver. To attract and direct a deaf child's attention, caregivers can break his line of gaze using hand and body movements, touch, and pointing to allow language input. In order to make language salient, parents should use short, simple sentences so that the child's attention doesn’t have to be divided for too long. Finally, to reduce the need for divided attention, a caregiver can position themselves and objects within the child's visual field so that language and the object can be seen at the same time.

Speech and oral methods

For deaf children who use listening and spoken language as their primary mode of communication, their families will often participate in Auditory-verbal therapy, a means of enhancing the innate language and listening skills of deaf children. Most children who receive appropriate amplification before the age of 18 months and receive appropriate auditory-verbal instruction will follow language-learning trajectories of their peers who have typical hearing.[29]

Signing and manual methods

ASL (American sign language)

ASL employs signs made by moving one's hands along with one's facial expressions and body language. Some studies indicate that if a deaf child learns sign language, he or she will be less likely to learn spoken languages because they will lose motivation. However, Humphries insists that there is no evidence for this.[30]

Manually coded English

Manually coded English is any one of a number of different representations of the English language that uses manual signs to encode English words visually. Although MCE uses signs, it is not a language like ASL; it is an encoding of English that uses hand gestures to make English visible in a visual mode. Most types of MCE use signs borrowed or adapted from American Sign Language, but use English sentence order and grammatical construction.

Numerous systems of manually encoded English have been proposed and used with greater or lesser success. Methods such as Signed English, Signing Exact English,[31] Linguistics of Visual English, and others use signs borrowed from ASL along with various grammatical marker signs, to indicate whole words, or meaning-bearing morphemes like -ed or -ing.

Because MCE systems are encodings of English which follow English word order and sentence structure, it's possible to sign MCE and speak English at the same time. This is a technique that is used in order to teach deaf children the structure of the English language not only through the sound and lip-reading patterns of spoken English, but also through manual patterns of signed English. Because of the close connection between the two, it is easier for hearing people to learn MCE than ASL.

Cued speech

Cued Speech is a hybrid, oral/manual system of communication used by some deaf or hard-of-hearing people. It is a technique that uses handshapes near the mouth ("cues") to represent phonemes that can be challenging for some deaf or hard-of-hearing people to distinguish from one another through speechreading ("lipreading") alone. It is designed to help receptive communicators to observe and fully understand the speaker.

Cued speech is not a signed language, and it does not have any signs in common with ASL. It is a kind of augmented speechreading, making speechreading much more accurate and accessible to deaf people. The handshapes by themselves have no meaning; they only have meaning as a cue in combination with a mouth shape, so that the mouth shape 'two lips together' plus one handshape might mean an 'M' sound, the same shape with a different cue might represent a 'B' sound, and with a third cue might represent a 'P' sound.

Some research shows a link between lack of phonological awareness and reading disorders, and indicate that teaching cued speech may be an aid to phonological awareness and literacy.[32]

Fingerspelling

Another manual encoding system used by the deaf and which has been around for more than two centuries is fingerspelling. Fingerspelling is a system that encodes letters and not words or morphemes, so is not a manual encoding of English, but rather an encoding of the alphabet. As such, it is a method of spelling out words one letter at a time using 26 different handshapes. In the United States and many other countries, the letters are indicated on one hand[33] and go back to the deaf school of the Abbe de l'Epee in Paris. Since fingerspelling is connected to the alphabet and not to entire words, it can be used to spell out words in any language that uses the same alphabet; so it is not tied to any one language in particular, and to that extent, it is analogous to other letter-encodings, such as Morse code, or Semaphore. The Rochester Method relies heavily on fingerspelling, but it is slow and has mostly fallen out of favor.

Hybrid methods

Hybrid methods use a mixture of aural/oral methods as well as some visible indicators such as hand shapes in order to communicate in the standard spoken language by making parts of it visible to those with hearing loss.

Literacy

Reading

According to Goldin-Meadow, reading requires two essential abilities: familiarity with a language and understanding the mapping between that language and the written word. However, reading is possible if deaf children learn ASL. Once they have acquired ASL, deaf children learn how to map between sign language and print so that they can learn English. Several techniques are used to help bridge the gap between ASL and spoken language or the "translation process" such as sandwiching and chaining.

Sandwiching consists of alternating between saying the word and signing it. Chaining consists of finger spelling a word, pointing to the spoken language version of the word and using pictorial support. Although chaining is not widely used, it creates an understanding between the visual spelling of a word and the sign language spelling of the word. This helps the child become bilingual in both ASL and spoken language.

The deaf child's social context is crucial for nurturing his or her capacity to read. Research shows that deaf children born to deaf parents are usually better readers than deaf children born to hearing parents. This is because deaf parents provide a strong social and emotional network and may immediately have access to the necessary resources for their child. Deaf parents already anticipate the needs of their child, having been through the same experience, as opposed to a hearing parent.

Cochlear implants

A cochlear implant is placed surgically inside the cochlea, which is the part of the inner ear that converts sound to neural signals. There is much debate regarding the linguistic conditions under which deaf children acquire spoken language via cochlear implantation. Some studies have concluded that long-term use of sign language impedes the development of spoken language and reading ability in deaf and hard of hearing children, and that using sign language is not at all advantageous, and can be detrimental to language development.[34][35][36] However, studies have found that sign language exposure actually facilitates the development of spoken language of Deaf children of Deaf parents who had exposure to sign language from birth. These children outperformed their deaf peers who were born to hearing parents following cochlear implantation.[37][38]

Ethics and language acquisition

Cochlear implants have been the subject of a heated debate between those that believe deaf children should receive the implants and those that do not. Members of the Deaf Community believe this is an important ethical problem. They strongly advocate that sign language is their first or native language just as any other spoken language is for a hearing person. They do not see deafness as a deficiency in any way, but rather a normal human trait amongst a variety of different ones. One issue on the ethical perspective of implantation is the possible side effects that may present themselves after surgery (the body may physically reject the implant; for some reason, there may not be any benefit, or very little gained; the internal component may need to be replaced causing the need for another surgery), even in some cases lessening listening capabilities, losing residual hearing or hearing sounds differently. While the surgery presents one positive solution, these side effects are not often taken into account but are significant and need to be afforded more attention. However, complications from cochlear implant surgery is a rare event, with some centers showing less than a three percent failure rate."Cochlear Implant Failure Rate Generally Low".

Relationship between language acquisition and other domains of development

Cognitive development

Early exposure to language facilitates language acquisition, regardless of whether or not that exposure is native or non-native, as well as many other domains of development, such as cognitive development, including executive functioning skills. Executive functioning skills are extremely important, as these are the skills that guide learning and behavior[39]. These skills include self-regulation, inhibition, emotional control, working memory, and planning and organization, which contribute to overall social, emotional and academic development for children. Early access to a language, such as sign language, from birth supports the development of these cognitive skills and abilities in Deaf and hard of hearing children, and supports their development in this area[40].

However, late exposure to language and delayed language acquisition can inhibit or delay the cognitive development of deaf and hard of hearing children, and impact these skills. This late exposure to language, or lack thereof, can be defined as language deprivation (see Language deprivation in deaf and hard of hearing children). This experience is the result of a lack of exposure to natural human language, whether that be spoken or signed language, during the critical language period[39]. Approximately 90% of Deaf children are born to hearing parents, and 95% of those Deaf children experience language deprivation to some degree[39]. Language Deprivation has been found to impair deaf children’s cognitive development, specifically their executive functioning skills, and working memory, causing deficits in critical executive functioning skills and overall cognitive development.[41]. It is not deafness that causes these deficits, but late language acquisition that influences the cognitive development and abilities of deaf people.[41]

Social-emotional development

Having an acquired language means an individual has had full access to at least one spoken or signed language.Typically, if a person has had this full access to language and has been able to acquire it, then being able to enter into a realm of social and emotional becomes plausible. Being able to communicate using is critical for those still developing their social skills[42]. There is also evidence to suggest that language acquisition can play a critical role in developing Theory of Mind, or developing the understanding of false beliefs in language[43]. For children who have been deprived of this access or have not yet fully acquired a language, social development can be hindered, which in turn can affect one’s emotional development as well.

The lack of socialization can significantly impact a child’s emotional well-being. A child’s first experience with social communication typically begins at home, but deaf and hard of hearing children in particular who are born to hearing parents tend to struggle with this interaction, due to the fact that they are a “minority in their own family"[44]. Parents who have a Deaf child typically do not know a signed language, the logistical problem can become how to give that child a full language. If deaf and hard of hearing children are not developing their social skills at home, by the time they enter school, they can be behind in this development. All of this can lead to struggles with proper emotional development. It can be hard on a child who was not given a language early to try and express their emotions appropriately. The problem is not with the deaf child, but instead, not giving a deaf or hard of hearing child the necessary language access from birth that other children receive[45]. There are theories to suggest that language acquisition is a predictor of how a child can develop Theory of Mind and without a full language, this skill becomes null. Theory of Mind can be an indicator of social and cognitive development. Without language acquisition, Deaf children can become behind in Theory of Mind and the skills that coincide, which can lead to further social and emotional delays.[46]

Academic development

Second language acquisition is also highly affected by early language exposure[47]. More exposure in an accessible language leads to better performance in the second language upon entering school[47]. Providing deaf and hard of hearing children with the most language exposure possible from birth promotes both first and second language acquisition. This means giving students the opportunity to develop language at home and in social environments early on supports the child's language acquisition in American Sign Language as well as printed English[42]. There is extensive research regarding the correlation between proficiency in ASL and proficiency in English literacy skills[48].. Deaf students with higher ASL proficiency tend to have higher English reading and writing scores[48]. There is also research to support that the development of a second language also improves proficiency in the student's first language[47]

According to Hrastinski & Wilbur (2016), American Sign Language proficiency is the single most contributing factor to Deaf student’s academic achievement, particularly in reading literacy and math.[49]. Deaf and hard of hearing children who have higher levels of American Sign Language proficiency and those who have higher proficiency in a second language (e.g., English) are those who were exposed to American Sign Language during the critical period of language.[49]

See also

References

  1. 1 2 Bradham, Tamala; Jones, Julibeth (July 2008). "Cochlear implant candidacy in the United States: Prevalence in children 12 months to 6 years of age". International Journal of Pediatric Otorhinolaryngology. 72 (7): 1023–1028. doi:10.1016/j.ijporl.2008.03.005. Retrieved 27 November 2016.
  2. 1 2 Hyde, M.; Punch, R.; Komesaroff, L. (2010-03-01). "Coming to a Decision About Cochlear Implantation: Parents Making Choices for their Deaf Children". Journal of Deaf Studies and Deaf Education. 15 (2): 162–178. doi:10.1093/deafed/enq004. ISSN 1081-4159.
  3. 1 2 3 Kuhl, Patricia (2007). "Cracking the speech code: How infants learn language". Acoustical Science and Technology. 28: 81.
  4. ↑ Werker, Janet F.; Hensch, Takao K. (3 January 2015). "Critical Periods in Speech Perception: New Directions". Annual Review of Psychology. 66 (1): 174. doi:10.1146/annurev-psych-010814-015104. ISSN 0066-4308.
  5. 1 2 Humphries, Tom; Kushalnagar, Poorna; Mathur, Gaurav; Napoli, Donna Jo; Padden, Carol; Rathmann, Christian; Smith, Scott R. (2 April 2012). "Language acquisition for deaf children: Reducing the harms of zero tolerance to the use of alternative approaches". Harm Reduction Journal. 9: 2–3. doi:10.1186/1477-7517-9-16. ISSN 1477-7517.
  6. ↑ Woolfe, Tyron; Herman, Rosalind; Roy, Penny; Woll, Bencie (1 March 2010). "Early vocabulary development in deaf native signers: a British Sign Language adaptation of the communicative development inventories". Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry. 51 (3): 329–330. doi:10.1111/j.1469-7610.2009.02151.x. ISSN 1469-7610.
  7. ↑ Pfau, Roland; Steinbach, Markus; Woll, Bencie (2012). Sign Language : An International Handbook. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton. p. 677. ISBN 978-3-11-020421-6.
  8. 1 2 3 Mitchell, Ross E.; Karchmer, Michaela (2004). "Chasing the Mythical Ten Percent: Parental Hearing Status of Deaf and Hard of Hearing Students in the United States". Sign Language Studies. Gallaudet University Press. 4 (2): 138–163. ISSN 0302-1475. JSTOR 26190985.
  9. 1 2 3 Humphries, Tom; Kushalnagar, Poorna; Mathur, Gaurav; Napoli, Donna Jo; Padden, Carol; Rathmann, Christian (2014-06-21). "Ensuring language acquisition for deaf children: What linguists can do". Language. 90 (2): e31–e52. doi:10.1353/lan.2014.0036. ISSN 1535-0665.
  10. ↑ Marschark, Marc; Spencer, Patricia (2010). The Oxford handbook of deaf studies, language, and education. New York: Oxford University Press. p. 284. ISBN 9780195390032. OCLC 607613491.
  11. ↑ Brentari, Diane (2012). Sign Languages. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. p. 24. doi:10.1017/cbo9780511712203. ISBN 9780521883702.
  12. ↑ Dettman, Shani Joy; Dowell, Richard Charles; Choo, Dawn; Arnott, Wendy; Abrahams, Yetta; Davis, Aleisha; Dornan, Dimity; Leigh, Jaime; Constantinescu, Gabriella (February 2016). "Long-term Communication Outcomes for Children Receiving Cochlear Implants Younger Than 12 Months: A Multicenter Study". Otology & Neurotology. 37 (2): e82. doi:10.1097/MAO.0000000000000915. ISSN 1531-7129.
  13. 1 2 Levine, Dani; Strother-Garcia, Kristina; Golinkoff, Roberta Michnick; Hirsh-Pasek, Kathy (2016-02-01). "Language Development in the First Year of Life". Otology & Neurotology. 37 (2): e56–e62. doi:10.1097/mao.0000000000000908. ISSN 1531-7129.
  14. ↑ Dettman, Shani (2013). "Communication Outcomes for Groups of Children Using Cochlear Implants Enrolled in Auditory-Verbal, Aural-Oral, and Bilingual-Bicultural Early Intervention Programs". Otology & Neurotology. 34 (3). doi:10.1097/mao.0b013e3182839650.
  15. ↑ Geers, Ann (2017). "Early Sign Language Exposure and Cochlear Implantation Benefits". Pediatrics. 140 (1). doi:10.1542/peds.2016-3489.
  16. ↑ Percy-Smith, Lone (2008). "Factors That Affect the Social Well-Being of Children with Cochlear Implants". Cochlear Implants International. 9 (4).
  17. 1 2 Pfau, Roland; Steinbach, Markus; Woll, Bencie (2012). Sign language : An international handbook. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton. p. 647. ISBN 9783110204216. OCLC 812574063.
  18. ↑ Petitto, Laura Ann; Marentette, P (1991). "Babbling in the manual mode: Evidence for the ontogeny of language". Science. 251: 483–1496. PMID 2006424.
  19. 1 2 Stone, Adam; Petitto, Laura Ann; Bosworth, Rain (December 2017). "Visual Sonority Modulates Infants' Attraction to Sign Language" (PDF). Language Learning and Development: 1–19.
  20. 1 2 Petitto, Laura Ann; Zatorre, Robert J.; Gauna, Kristine; Nikelski, E. J.; Dostie, Deanna; Evans, Alan C. (2000-12-05). "Speech-like cerebral activity in profoundly deaf people processing signed languages: Implications for the neural basis of human language". Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. 97 (25): 13961–13966. doi:10.1073/pnas.97.25.13961. ISSN 0027-8424. PMC 17683. PMID 11106400.
  21. ↑ Brentari, Diane; González, Carolina; Seidl, Amanda; Wilbur, Ronnie (January 2011). "Sensitivity to Visual Prosodic Cues in Signers and Nonsigners". Language and Speech. 54: 57–61.
  22. ↑ Krentz, Ursula C.; Corina, David P. (2008-01-01). "Preference for language in early infancy: the human language bias is not speech specific". Developmental Science. 11 (1): 1–9. doi:10.1111/j.1467-7687.2007.00652.x. ISSN 1467-7687.
  23. 1 2 MacSweeney, Mairéad; Waters, Dafydd; Brammer, Michael J.; Woll, Bencie; Goswami, Usha. "Phonological processing in deaf signers and the impact of age of first language acquisition". NeuroImage. 40 (3): 1369–1379. doi:10.1016/j.neuroimage.2007.12.047.
  24. ↑ Marschark, Mark; Schick, Brenda; Spencer, Patricia (2006). Understanding sign language development of deaf children. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press. pp. 12–16. ISBN 0-19-518094-1.
  25. ↑ Spencer, Patricia; Harris, Margaret (2006). "Patterns and effects of language input to deaf infants and toddlers from deaf and hearing mothers". Advances in the sign language development of deaf children: 71–101.
  26. ↑ Harris, M. (2001-07-01). "It's All a Matter of Timing: Sign Visibility and Sign Reference in Deaf and Hearing Mothers of 18-Month-Old Children". Journal of Deaf Studies and Deaf Education. 6 (3): 177–185. doi:10.1093/deafed/6.3.177. ISSN 1081-4159.
  27. 1 2 3 Pizer, Meier, G, R (2008). "Pizer, G., & Meier, R. P. (2008). Child-directed signing in ASL and children's development of joint attention". Sign languages: Spinning and unraveling the past, present and future: TISLR9, forty five papers and three posters from the 9th Theoretical Issues in Sign Language Research Conference: 459–474.
  28. ↑ Meadow-Orlans, Kathryn P. (1997-01-01). "Effects of Mother and Infant Hearing Status on Interactions at Twelve and Eighteen Months". The Journal of Deaf Studies and Deaf Education. 2 (1): 26–36. doi:10.1093/oxfordjournals.deafed.a014307. ISSN 1081-4159.
  29. ↑ Niparko, John; Tobey, Emily; Thal, Donna (April 21, 2010). "Spoken Language Development in Children Following Cochlear Implantation". JAMA. 303 (15): 1498–1506. doi:10.1001/jama.2010.451. PMC 3073449.
  30. ↑ Humphries, Tom; Kushalnagar, Poorna; Mathur, Gaurav; Napoli, Donna Jo; Padden, Carol; Rathmann, Christian; Smith, Scott R. (2012-01-01). "Language acquisition for deaf children: Reducing the harms of zero tolerance to the use of alternative approaches". Harm Reduction Journal. 9: 16. doi:10.1186/1477-7517-9-16. ISSN 1477-7517. PMC 3384464. PMID 22472091.
  31. ↑ Kong, W. W., & Ranganath, S. (2008). Signing exact english (see): Modeling and recognition. Pattern Recognition, 41(5), 1638-1652.
  32. ↑ Ostrander, Carolyn (1998). "The Relationship Between Phonological Coding And Reading Achievement In Deaf Children: Is Cued Speech A Special Case?". Archived from the original on 2007-11-13. Retrieved 2018-02-11.
  33. ↑ Carmel, Simon (1982). International hand alphabet charts. National Association of the Deaf (United States); 2nd edition. (June 1982). ISBN 0-9600886-2-8
  34. ↑ Geers, A. E.; Moog, J. S.; Biedenstein, J.; Brenner, C.; Hayes, H. (2009-07-01). "Spoken Language Scores of Children Using Cochlear Implants Compared to Hearing Age-Mates at School Entry". Journal of Deaf Studies and Deaf Education. 14 (3): 371–385. doi:10.1093/deafed/enn046. ISSN 1081-4159.
  35. ↑ Dettman, Shani (2013). "Communication Outcomes for Groups of Children Using Cochlear Implants Enrolled in Auditory-Verbal, Aural-Oral, and Bilingual-Bicultural Early Intervention Programs". Otology & Neurotology. 34 (3). doi:10.1097/mao.0b013e3182839650.
  36. ↑ Geers, Ann (2017). "Early Sign Language Exposure and Cochlear Implantation Benefits". Pediatrics. 140 (1). doi:10.1542/peds.2016-3489.
  37. ↑ Hassanzadeh, S. (2012). "Outcomes of cochlear implantation in deaf children of deaf parents: comparative study". The Journal of Laryngology & Otology. 126 (10): 989–994. doi:10.1017/S0022215112001909. ISSN 0022-2151.
  38. ↑ Davidson, K.; Lillo-Martin, D.; Pichler, D. Chen (2014-04-01). "Spoken English Language Development Among Native Signing Children With Cochlear Implants". Journal of Deaf Studies and Deaf Education. 19 (2): 238–250. doi:10.1093/deafed/ent045. ISSN 1081-4159. PMC 3952677.
  39. 1 2 3 Hall, Matthew L.; Eigsti, Inge-Marie; Bortfeld, Heather; Lillo-Martin, Diane (2016-09-13). "Auditory Deprivation Does Not Impair Executive Function, But Language Deprivation Might: Evidence From a Parent-Report Measure in Deaf Native Signing Children". Journal of Deaf Studies and Deaf Education. 22 (1): 9–21. doi:10.1093/deafed/enw054. ISSN 1081-4159.
  40. ↑ "Age constraints on first versus second language acquisition: Evidence for linguistic plasticity and epigenesis". Brain and Language. 87 (3): 369–384. 2003-12-01. doi:10.1016/S0093-934X(03)00137-8. ISSN 0093-934X.
  41. 1 2 Marshall, Chloë; Jones, Anna; Denmark, Tanya; Mason, Kathryn; Atkinson, Joanna; Botting, Nicola; Morgan, Gary (2015). "Deaf children's non-verbal working memory is impacted by their language experience". Frontiers in Psychology. 6. doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2015.00527. ISSN 1664-1078.
  42. 1 2 Calderon, Rosemary (2000). "Parental Involvement in Deaf Children's Education Programs as a Predictor of Child's Language, Early Reading, and Social- Emotional Development" (PDF).
  43. ↑ Schick, Brenda; de Villiers, Peter; de Villiers, Jill; Hoffmeister, Robert (2007-03). "Language and Theory of Mind: A Study of Deaf Children". Child Development. 78 (2): 376–396. doi:10.1111/j.1467-8624.2007.01004.x. ISSN 0009-3920. Check date values in: |date= (help)
  44. ↑ NEWSOM, CAROL; Newsom, Professor of Old Testament Carol A. (2003). Oxford Handbook of Deaf Studies, Language, and Education. Oxford University Press. ISBN 9780195149975.
  45. ↑ NEWSOM, CAROL; Newsom, Professor of Old Testament Carol A. (2003). Oxford Handbook of Deaf Studies, Language, and Education. Oxford University Press. ISBN 9780195149975.
  46. ↑ Schick, Brenda; de Villiers, Peter; de Villiers, Jill; Hoffmeister, Robert (2007-03). "Language and Theory of Mind: A Study of Deaf Children". Child Development. 78 (2): 376–396. doi:10.1111/j.1467-8624.2007.01004.x. ISSN 0009-3920. Check date values in: |date= (help)
  47. 1 2 3 Kroll; et al. (2015). "Bilingualism, Mind, and Brain". Annual Review of Linguistics. 1: 377–394 – via Annual Reviews.
  48. 1 2 Cummins, Jim (2006). "The Relationship between American Sign Language Proficiency and English Academic Development: A Review of the Research". Research Gate.
  49. 1 2 "Academic Achievement of Deaf and Hard-of-Hearing Students in an ASL/English Bilingual Program" (PDF).

  • Meier, R. (1991). Language Acquisition by Deaf Children. American Scientist (Vol. 79, pp. 60–70). Sigma Xi, The Scientific Research Society.
  • Pinker, S.; Jackendoff, R. (2005). "The faculty of language: what's special about it?". Cognition. 95: 201–236. doi:10.1016/j.cognition.2004.08.004. PMID 15694646.
  • Paul, P. (2009). Language and Deafness. 4th Edition. Sudbury: Jones & Bartlett Learning.
  • Mohay, H., Milton L., Hindmarsh, G. & Ganley K. (1998). Deaf Mothers as Communication Models for Hearing Families with Deaf Children. In Weisel, A. (Ed.), Issues Unresolved: New Perspectives on Language and Deaf Education (pp. 76–87). Washington: Gallaudet University Press.
  • Bowe, F (1998). "Language Development in Deaf Children". Journal of Deaf Studies and Deaf Education. 3 (1): 73–77. doi:10.1093/oxfordjournals.deafed.a014342.
  • Scott, S & Simms, L. (2012). Everything You Always Wanted to Know About ASL/English Bimodal Bilingual Education [Handout].
  • Goldin-Meadow, S.; Mayberry, R. (2001). "How Do Profoundly Deaf Children Learn to Read?". Learning Diabilities Research & Practice. 16 (4): 222–229. doi:10.1111/0938-8982.00022.
  • Meadow, K (2005). "Early Manual Communication in Relation to the Deaf Child's Intellectual, Social, and Communicative Functioning". Journal of Deaf Studies in Deaf Education. 10 (4): 321–329. doi:10.1093/deafed/eni035.
  • Svirsky, M.; et al. (2000). "Language Development in Profoundly Deaf Children With Cochlear Implants". Psychological Science. 11 (2): 153–158. doi:10.1111/1467-9280.00231. PMC 3429133.
  • Goldin-Meadow, S. et al. (1984). Gestural Communication in Deaf Children: The Effects and Noneffects of Parental Input on Early Language Development. Monographs of the Society for Research in Child Development (Vol. 49, pp. 1–151). Wiley.
  • Examining Chomsky's Inborn Universal Grammar Theory. (n.d.). In Boundless. Retrieved November 11, 2013.
  • Cochlear Implants - Benefits and Risks of Cochlear Implants. (September 8, 2010). In U.S. Food and Drug Administration. Retrieved November 11, 2013.
  • American Sign Language. (June 2011). In National Institute on Deafness and Other Communication Disorders (NIDCD). Retrieved November 11, 2013.
  • Humphries, T. et al. (2012). Language acquisition for deaf children: Reducing the harms of zero tolerance to the use of alternative approaches. Harm Reduction Journal, 9 (16).
  • Courtin, C. (2000). The Impact of Sign Language on the Cognitive Development of Deaf Children: The Case of Theories of Mind. Journal of Deaf Studies and Deaf Education, 5(3), 266-276.
This article is issued from Wikipedia. The text is licensed under Creative Commons - Attribution - Sharealike. Additional terms may apply for the media files.