Abstract published In:
Sign Language & LinguisticsVol. 25:2 (2022) ► pp.235–244
Dissertation Abstract
Development of spatial language and memory
Effects of language modality and late sign language exposure
Article outline
- Context of the work
- Methodology
- Study 1: Modality differences & spatial language use (Chapter 2)
- Study 2: Late exposure & spatial language use (Chapter 3)
- Study 3: Modality differences & spatial memory (Chapter 4)
- Study 4: Late language exposure & spatial memory (Chapter 5)
- Conclusion
-
References
References
Clark, Eve V.
2004 How language acquisition builds on cognitive development. Trends in Cognitive Sciences 8(10). 472–478. 
İlkbaşaran, Deniz
2015 Literacies, mobilities and agencies of deaf youth in Turkey: Constraints and opportunities in the 21st century. San Diego, CA: University of California PhD dissertation.
Karadöller, Dilay Z., Beyza Sümer, Ercenur Ünal & Aslı Özyürek
2022 Late sign language exposure does not modulate the relation between spatial language and spatial memory in deaf children and adults. Memory and Cognition. Advance online publication.
Karadöller, Dilay Z., Beyza Sümer, Ercenur Ünal & Özyürek, A.
Under review. Sign advantage for children: Signing children’s spatial expressions are more informative than speaking children’s speech and gestures combined.
Karadöller, Dilay Z., Beyza Sümer & Aslı Özyürek
2021 Effects and non-effects of late language exposure on spatial language development: Evidence from deaf adults and children. Language Learning and Development 171, 1–25.
2017 Effects of delayed language exposure on spatial language acquisition by signing children and adults. In Glenn Gunzelmann, Andrew Howes, Thora Tenbrink & Eddy Davelaar (eds.), Proceedings of the 39th annual conference of the cognitive science society (CogSci 2017), 2372–2376. Austin, TX: Cognitive Science Society.
Karadöller, Dilay Z., Beyza Sümer, Ercenur Ünal & Aslı Özyürek
2021 Spatial language use predicts spatial memory of children: Evidence from sign, speech, and speech-plus-gesture. In Tecumseh Fitch, Claus Lamm, Helmut Leder & Kristin Tessmar (eds.), Proceedings of the 43th annual conference of the Cognitive Science Society (CogSci 2021), 672–678. Vienna: Cognitive Science Society.
Lillo-Martin, Diane & John Henner
2021 Acquisition of sign languages. Annual Review of Linguistics 71. 395–419.
Mayberry, Rachel I.
1998 The critical period for language acquisition and the deaf child’s language comprehension: A psycholinguistic approach. Bulletin de Audiophonologie 141. 349–360.
Mitchell, Rose E. & Michael A. Karchmer
2004 Chasing the mythical ten percent: Parental hearing status of deaf and hard of hearing students in the United States. Sign Language Studies 4(2). 138–163.
Özyürek, Aslı
2018 Cross-linguistic variation in children’s multimodal utterances. In Maya Hickmann, Edy Veneziano & Harriet Jisa (eds.), Sources of variation in first language acquisition: Languages, contexts, and learners, 123–138. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Perniss, Pamela M., Inge Zwitserlood & Aslı Özyürek
2015 Does space structure spatial language? A comparison of spatial expression across sign languages. Language 91(3). 611–641.
Sümer, Beyza
2015 Acquisition of spatial language by signing and speaking children: A comparison of Turkish Sign Language (TİD) and Turkish. Nijmegen: Radboud University PhD dissertation.
Sümer, Beyza & Aslı Özyürek
2020 No effects of modality in development of locative expressions of space in signing and speaking children. Journal of Child Language 47(6). 1101–1131.