Cover not available
Article published In:
Sign Language & Linguistics
Vol. 17:2 (2014) ► pp.181–212

Prosody in a communication system developed without a language model

| University of Chicago
| University of Connecticut

Prosody, the “music” of language, is an important aspect of all natural languages, spoken and signed. We ask here whether prosody is also robust across learning conditions. If a child were not exposed to a conventional language and had to construct his own communication system, would that system contain prosodic structure? We address this question by observing a deaf child who received no sign language input and whose hearing loss prevented him from acquiring spoken language. Despite his lack of a conventional language model, this child developed his own gestural system. In this system, features known to mark phrase and utterance boundaries in established sign languages were used to consistently mark the ends of utterances, but not to mark phrase or utterance internal boundaries. A single child can thus develop the seeds of a prosodic system, but full elaboration may require more time, more users, or even more generations to blossom.

Keywords: homesign, communication, gesture, prosody, intonational phrase, sign language
Published online: 24 November 2014
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/sll.17.2.02app
References
Alibali, Martha W., Sotaro Kita & Amanda J. Young
2000 Gesture and the process of speech production: We think, therefore we gesture. Language and Cognitive Processes 15(6). 593–613. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Aronoff, Mark, Irit Meir, Carol Padden & Wendy Sandler
2008 The roots of linguistic organization in a new language. Interaction Studies 9(1). 133–153. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Baker, Charlotte & Carol Padden
1978 Focusing on the non-manual components of American Sign Language. In Patricia Siple (ed.), Understanding language through sign language research, 27–58. New York, NY: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Balog, Heather L. & Diane Brentari
2008 The relationship between early gestures and intonation. First Language 28(2). 141–163. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Beckman, Mary. E. & Janet B. Pierrehumbert
1986 Intonational structure in Japanese and English. Phonology Yearbook 31. 255–309. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Benitez-Quiroz, C. Fabian, Kadir Gökgöz, Ronnie B. Wilbur & Aleix M. Martinez
2014 Discriminant features and temporal structure of nonmanuals in American Sign Language. PLoS ONE 9(2): E86268. DOI logo.Google Scholar
Bolinger, Dwight
1983 Intonation and gesture. American Speech 58(2). 156–174. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Brentari, Diane, Marie Coppola, Laura Mazzoni & Susan Goldin-Meadow
2012 When does a system become phonological? Handshape production in gesturers, signers, and homesigners. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 30(1). 1–31. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Brentari, Diane & Laurinda Crossley
2002 Prosody on the hands and face: Evidence from American Sign Language. Sign Language & Linguistics 5(2). 105–130. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Brentari, Diane, Carolina González, Amanda Seidl & Ronnie Wilbur
2011 Sensitivity to visual prosodic cues in signers and nonsigners. Language and Speech 54(1). 49–72. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Butcher, Cynthia, Carolyn Mylander & Susan Goldin-Meadow
1991 Displaced communication in a self styled gesture system: Pointing at the nonpresent. Cognitive Development 6(3). 315–342. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Conrad, Reuben
1977 Lip-reading by deaf and hearing children. British Journal of Educational Psychology 471. 60–65. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
1979 The deaf child. London: Harper & Row.Google Scholar
Coppola, Marie & Elissa L. Newport
2005 Grammatical Subjects in home sign: Abstract linguistic structure in adult primary gesture systems without linguistic input. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America 102(52), 19249–19253. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Coppola, Marie & Ann Senghas
2010 Deixis in an emerging sign language. In D. Brentari (ed.), Sign languages: A Cambridge language survey, 543–569. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cutler, Anne, Delphine Dahan & Wilma van Donselaar
1997 Prosody in the comprehension of spoken language: A literature review. Language and Speech 40(2). 141–201. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Dachkovsky, Svetlana, Christina Healy & Wendy Sandler
2013 Visual intonation in two sign languages. Phonology 30(2). 211–252. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Dachkovsky, Svetlana & Wendy Sandler
2009 Visual intonation in the prosody of a sign language. Language and Speech 52(2-3). 287–314. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Farwell, Roberta M
1976 Speech reading: A research review. American Annals of the Deaf 1211. 19–30.Google Scholar
Feldman, Heidi, Susan Goldin-Meadow & Lila Gleitman
1978 Beyond Herodotus: The creation of language by linguistically deprived deaf children. In Andrew Lock (ed.), Action, gesture and symbol: The emergence of language, 351–414. New York, NY: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Fenlon, Jordan, Tanya Denmark, Ruth Campbell & Bencie Woll
2007 Seeing sentence boundaries. Sign Language & Linguistics 10(2). 177–200. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Franklin, Amy, Anastasia Giannakidou & Susan Goldin-Meadow
2011 Negation, questions, and structure building in a homesign system. Cognition 1181. 398–416. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Graf, Hans Peter, Eric Cosatto, Volker Strom & Fu Jie Huang
2002 Visual prosody: Facial movement accompanying speech. Proceedings of the Fifth IEEE International Conference on Automatic Face and Gesture Recognition . 381–386.
Goldin-Meadow, Susan
1979 Structure in a manual communication system developed without a conventional language model: Language without a helping hand. In Haiganoosh Whitaker & Harry Whitaker (eds.), Studies in neurolinguistics, Vol. 41, 125–209. New York: Academic Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
1982 The resilience of recursion: A study of a communication system developed without a conventional language model. In Eric Wanner & Lila R. Gleitman (eds.), Language acquisition: The state of the art, 51–77. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
1985 Language development under atypical learning conditions: Replication and implications of a study of deaf children of hearing parents. In Keith E. Nelson (ed.), Children’s language, Vol. 51, 197–245. Hillsdale, N.J.: Lawrence Erlbaum & Associates.Google Scholar
1987 Underlying redundancy and its reduction in a language developed without a language model: Constraints imposed by conventional linguistic input. In Barbara Lust (ed.), Studies in the acquisition of anaphora: Vol. II, applying the constraints, 105–133. Boston, MA: D. Reidel Publishing Company. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2003 The resilience of language. New York, NY: Psychology Press.Google Scholar
Goldin-Meadow, Susan & Heidi Feldman
1977 The development of language-like communication without a language model. Science 197(4301). 401–403. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Goldin-Meadow, Susan & Carolyn Mylander
1983 Gestural communications in deaf children: The non effect of parental input on language development. Science 2211. 372–374. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
1984 Gestural communication in deaf children: The effects and non effects of parental input in early language development. Monographs of the Society for Research in Child Development 49(3). No. 207. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
1990 Beyond the input given: The child’s role in the acquisition of language. Language 661. 323–355. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
1998 Spontaneous sign systems created by deaf children in two cultures. Nature 3911. 279–281. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Goldin-Meadow, Susan, Cynthia Butcher, Carolyn Mylander & Mark Dodge
1994 Nouns and verbs in a self styled gesture system: What’s in a name? Cognitive Psychology 271. 259–259. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Goldin-Meadow, Susan, Carolyn Mylander & Cynthia Butcher
1995 The resilience of combinatorial structure at the word level: Morphology in self-styled gesture systems. Cognition 56(3). 195–262. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Goldin-Meadow, Susan, Carolyn Mylander & Amy Franklin
2007 How children make language out of gesture: Morphological structure in gesture systems developed by American and Chinese deaf children. Cognitive psychology 55(2). 87–135. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hansen, Martje & Jens Heßmann
2007 Matching propositional content and formal markers. Sign Language & Linguistics, 10(2). 145–175. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Herrmann, Annika & Markus Steinbach
2011 Nonmanuals in sign languages. Sign Language & Linguistics 14(1). 3–8. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hoffmeister, Robert
1978 The development of demonstrative pronouns, locatives and personal pronouns in the acquisition of American Sign Language by deaf children of deaf parents. PhD dissertation, University of Minnesota.
Hunsicker, Dea & Susan Goldin-Meadow
2012 Hierarchical structure in a self-created communication system: Building nominal constituents in homesign. Language 88(4). 732–763. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kubozono, Haruo
1989 The mora and syllable structure in Japanese: Evidence from speech errors. Language and Speech 32(3). 249–278. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ladd, D. Robert
1992 An introduction to intonational phonology. In Gerard J. Docherty & Robert Ladd (eds.), Papers in laboratory phonology II: Gesture, segment, prosody, 321–334. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lausberg, Hedda & Han Sloetjes
2009 Coding gestural behavior with the NEUROGES ELAN system. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, & Computers 41(3). 841–849. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Liddell, Scott
1978 Nonmanual signals and relative clauses in American Sign Language. In Patricia Siple (ed.), Understanding language through sign language research, 59–90. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
1980 American Sign Language syntax. The Hague: Mouton.Google Scholar
Malaia, Evie & Ronnie B. Wilbur
2011 Kinematic signatures of telic and atelic events in ASL predicates. Language and Speech 55(3). 407–421. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
McNeill, David
1979 The conceptual basis of language. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
1992 Hand and mind. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Mindel, Eugene D. & McCay Vernon
1971 They grow in silence: The deaf child and his family. Silver Springs, MD: National Association of the Deaf.Google Scholar
Moores, Donald F
1982 Educating the deaf: psychology, principles and practices (2nd ed.). Boston: Houghton Mifflin.Google Scholar
Morford, Jill P. & Susan Goldin-Meadow
1997 From here and now to there and then: The development of displaced reference in homesign and English. Child Development 68(3). 420–435. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Nespor, Marina & Wendy Sandler
1999 Prosody in Israeli Sign Language. Language and Speech 42(2-3). 143–176. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Nespor, Marina & Irene Vogel
1986 Prosodic phonology. Dordrecht: Foris.Google Scholar
2007 Prosodic phonology. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Nespor, Marina, Mohinish Shukla, Ruben van de Vijver, Cinzia Avesani, Hanna Schraudolf & Caterina Donati
2008 Different phrasal prominence realizations in VO and OV languages. Lingue e Linguaggio 21. 1–29.Google Scholar
Newport, Elissa L. & Ted Supalla
2000 Sign language research at the millennium. In Karen Emmorey & Harlan L. Lane (eds.), The signs of language revisited: An anthology to honor Ursula Bellugi and Edward Klima, 103–114. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Pyers, Jennie E. & Karen Emmorey
2008 The face of bimodal bilingualism: Grammatical markers in American Sign Language are produced when bilinguals speak to English monolinguals. Psychological Science 19(6). 531–536. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Sandler, Wendy
2010 Prosody and syntax in sign languages. Transactions of the Philological Society 108(3). 298–328. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Sandler, Wendy & Diane Lillo-Martin
2006 Sign language and linguistic universals. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Sandler, Wendy, Irit Meir, Svetlana Dachkovsky, Carol Padden & Mark Aronoff
2011 The emergence of complexity in prosody and syntax. Lingua 121(13). 2014–2033. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Sandler, Wendy, Irit Meir, Carol Padden & Mark Aronoff
2005 The emergence of grammar: Systematic structure in a new language. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 102(7). 2661–2665. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Schiffrin, Deborah
1994 Approaches to discourse. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Selkirk, Elizabeth
1984 Phonology and syntax: The relation between sound and structure. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Senghas, Ann
1995 Children’s contribution to the birth of Nicaraguan Sign Language. PhD dissertation,Massachusetts Institute of Technology. Distributed by MIT Working Papers in Linguistics.
Singleton, Jenny L., Jill P. Morford & Susan Goldin-Meadow
1993 Once is not enough: Standards of well-formedness in manual communication created over three different timespans, Language 691. 683–715. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Summerfield, A. Quentin
1983 Audio-visual speech perception, lipreading and artificial stimulation. In M.E. Lutman & M.P. Haggard (eds.), Hearing science and hearing disorders, 132–179. New York, NY: Academic Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Supalla, Ted
2008 Sign language archeology: Integrating historical linguistics with fieldwork on young sign languages. In Ronice de Quadros (ed.), Sign languages: Spinning and unraveling the past, present and future, 574–583. Petrópolis, Brazil: Editora Arara.Google Scholar
Swisher, M. Virginia
1989 The language-learning situation of deaf students. Teachers of English to Speakers Other Languages Quarterly 231. 239–257.Google Scholar
Tang, Gladys, Diane Brentari, Carolina González & Felix Sze
2010 Crosslinguistic variation in prosodic cues. In Diane Brentari (ed.), Sign languages, 519–542. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
van der Kooij, Els & Onno Crasborn
2008 Syllables and the word-prosodic system in Sign Language of the Netherlands. Lingua 1181. 1307–1327. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
van der Kooij, Els, Onno Crasborn & Wim Emmerik
2006 Explaining prosodic body leans in Sign Language of the Netherlands: Pragmatics required. Journal of Pragmatics 38(10). 1598–1614. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Wilbur, Ronnie B
1994 Eyeblinks and ASL phrase structure. Sign Language Studies 841. 221–240. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
1999 Stress in ASL: Empirical evidence and linguistic issues. Language and Speech 2-31. 229–250. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2000 Phonological and prosodic layering of nonmanuals in American Sign Language. In Karen Emmorey & Harlan L. Lane (eds.), The signs of language revisited: An anthology to honor Ursula Bellugi and Edward Klima, 213–244. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
2009 Productive reduplication in a fundamentally monosyllabic language. Language Sciences 311. 325–343. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Wilbur, Ronnie B. & Aleix Martínez
2002 Physical correlates of prosodic structure in American Sign Language. Chicago Linguistic Society 381. 693–704.Google Scholar
Wilbur, Ronnie B. & Cynthia G. Patschke
1998 Body leans and the marking of contrast in ASL. Journal of Pragmatics 301. 275–303. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
1999 Syntactic correlates of brow raise in ASL. Sign Language & Linguistics 21. 3–40. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Wolford, George
2012 Acquisition of prosody in American Sign Language. Master’s thesis, Purdue University. West LaFayette, IN.
Cited by

Cited by 7 other publications

Brentari, Diane & Susan Goldin-Meadow
2017. Language Emergence. Annual Review of Linguistics 3:1 ► pp. 363 ff. DOI logo
Goldin-Meadow, S., D. Brentari, M. Coppola, L. Horton & A. Senghas
2015. Watching language grow in the manual modality: Nominals, predicates, and handshapes. Cognition 136 ► pp. 381 ff. DOI logo
Goldin-Meadow, Susan
2015. Studying the mechanisms of language learning by varying the learning environment and the learner. Language, Cognition and Neuroscience 30:8 ► pp. 899 ff. DOI logo
Goldin-Meadow, Susan & Diane Brentari
2017. Gesture, sign, and language: The coming of age of sign language and gesture studies. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 40 DOI logo
Kelty-Stephen, Damian G., Erik P. Raymakers & Krista M. Matthews-Saugstad
2018. Prosody Improves Detection of Spoonerisms Versus Both Sensible and Nonsense Phrases. Language and Speech 61:1 ► pp. 71 ff. DOI logo
LeBaron, Virginia, Mehdi Boukhechba, James Edwards, Tabor Flickinger, David Ling & Laura E Barnes
2022. Exploring the Use of Wearable Sensors and Natural Language Processing Technology to Improve Patient-Clinician Communication: Protocol for a Feasibility Study. JMIR Research Protocols 11:5 ► pp. e37975 ff. DOI logo
Olszanowski, Michal, Natalia Frankowska & Aleksandra Tołopiło
2023. “Rear bias” in spatial auditory perception: Attentional and affective vigilance to sounds occurring outside the visual field. Psychophysiology DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 8 september 2023. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers. Any errors therein should be reported to them.