Article published in:
Sign Language & Linguistics
Vol. 24:2 (2021) ► pp. 143–181

Single-parameter and parameter combination errors in L2 productions of Swiss German Sign Language

| University of Zurich University of Zurich
| University of Teacher Education in Special Needs (HfH), ZurichUniversity of Teacher Education in Special Needs (HfH), Zurich
| University of Teacher Education in Special Needs (HfH), ZurichUniversity of Teacher Education in Special Needs (HfH), Zurich
| University of Teacher Education in Special Needs (HfH), ZurichUniversity of Teacher Education in Special Needs (HfH), Zurich
| Center for Sign Language Research BaselCenter for Sign Language Research Basel
This article presents a study of errors made by hearing adult L2 learners of Swiss German Sign Language (Deutschschweizerische Gebärdensprache, DSGS). As part of a statistical analysis of single-parameter errors, movement was found to be the parameter most susceptible to errors, followed by location, orientation, and handshape. An analysis of production errors with respect to combinations of manual parameters was also conducted, something that previously has not been undertaken. The parameter combination most frequently involved in errors was movement with location. Possible aspects contributing to the higher error rate for movement are suggested, among which are the inherent complexity of the movement parameter. Finally, the article discusses factors influencing the judgment of errors.
Keywords: phonological parameters, parameter errors, criteria for judging errors, L2 learning, Swiss German Sign Language
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.Previous work
    • 2.1Accuracy of production of phonological parameters by L2 signers
    • 2.2Definitions of error
      • 2.2.1Errors in sign languages
      • 2.2.2Errors in spoken languages
    • 2.3Erroneous features of phonological parameters by L2 signers
  • 3.Method
    • 3.1Participant recruitment
    • 3.2Selection of lexical items
    • 3.3Preparation of stimulus materials
    • 3.4Testing procedure
    • 3.5Transcription and annotation
      • 3.5.1Definition of error
      • 3.5.2Category of sign produced and joint confidence in the decision
      • 3.5.3Identification of parameters contributing to phonological errors
    • 3.6Statistical analyses
      • 3.6.1Single-parameter errors
      • 3.6.2Parameter combination errors
  • 4.Results
    • 4.1Statistical analyses of results
      • 4.1.1Single-parameter errors
      • 4.1.2Parameter combination errors
      • 4.1.3Degree of contribution of each parameter to the judgment of error
    • 4.2Movement errors
      • 4.2.1Phonological features involved in movement errors
      • 4.2.2Difficulties of the movement parameter
        • 4.2.2.1Complexity of the movement parameter
        • 4.2.2.2Especially marked movements
        • 4.2.2.3Direction of horizontal circling movements
        • 4.2.2.4L2 learners’ tendency to proximalize the movement
    • 4.3Movement+location errors
      • 4.3.1Perceptual salience
      • 4.3.2Adding or dropping body contact
    • 4.4Other factors influencing results
      • 4.4.1Judging L1 vs. L2 productions
      • 4.4.2Breadth of knowledge of lexical items on the part of raters
      • 4.4.3Degree of experience with teaching and/or researching sign language
  • 5.Concluding remarks and outlook
  • Acknowledgements
  • Notes
  • References
Published online: 02 July 2021
https://doi.org/10.1075/sll.19002.ebl
References
Arendsen, Jeroen
2009 Seeing signs. On the appearance of manual movements in gestures. Delft: Delft University of Technology PhD dissertation.Google Scholar
Baus, Cristina, Eva Gutiérrez & Manuel Carreiras
2014 The role of syllables in sign language production. Frontiers in Psychology 5(1254). 1–7. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Bochner, Joseph, Karen Christie & Peter Hauser
2011 When is a difference really different? Learners’ discrimination of linguistic contrasts in American Sign Language. Language Learning 61(4). 1328–1354. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Boyes Braem, Penny
2001 A multimedia bilingual database for the lexicon of Swiss German Sign Language. Sign Language & Linguistics 4(1/2). 133–143. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2004a,b / 2005a,b Linguistischer Kommentar. Gebärdensprachkurs Deutschschweiz, Stufen 1, 2, 3, and 4. Zürich: SGB-FSS. CD-ROMs.Google Scholar
Chaudron, Craig
1988 Second language classrooms: Research on teaching and learning. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Chen Pichler, Deborah
2009 Sign production in first-time hearing signers: A closer look at handshape accuracy. Cadernos de Saúde 2 (Número especial: Línguas gestuais). 37–50.Google Scholar
2011 Sources of handshape error in first-time signers of ASL. In Donna Jo Napoli & Gaurav Mathur (eds.), Deaf around the world, 96–121. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Chen Pichler, Deborah & Elena Koulidobrova
2016 Acquisition of sign language as a second language (L2). In Mark Marschark & Patricia Spencer (eds.), The Oxford handbook of Deaf studies in language, 218–230. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Chen Pichler, Deborah, Martin Watkins, Danica Dicus & Sadi Dudley
2016 Refining coding criteria for phonological accuracy of L2 signing. TISLR12 (Theoretical Issues in Sign Language Research), Melbourne, Australia 4–7 January.Google Scholar
Cohen, Jacob
1992 A power primer. Psychological Bulletin 112(1). 155–159. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Conlin, Kimberly, Gene R. Mirus, Claude Mauk & Richard P. Meier
2000 The acquisition of first signs: Place, handshape, and movement. In Charlene Chamberlain, Jill P. Morford & Rachel I. Mayberry (eds.), Language acquisition by eye, 51–69. Mahwah NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Cormier, Kearsy, Jordan Fenlon, Trevor Johnston, Ramas Rentelis, Adam Schembri, Katherine Rowley, Robert Adam, & Bencie Woll
2012 From Corpus to Lexical Database to Online Dictionary: Issues in Annotation of the BSL Corpus and the Development of BSL Signbank. Proceedings of the 5th LREC Workshop on the Representation and Processing of Sign Languages, Istanbul, Turkey. 7–12.
Cull, Amber
2014 Production of movement in users of American Sign Language and its influence on being identified as “non-native”. Washington, DC: Gallaudet University PhD dissertation.Google Scholar
Council of Europe
2009 Common European Framework of Reference for Languages: Learning, teaching, assessment. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Dye, Matthew W. G. & Shui-I Shih
2006 Phonological priming in British Sign Language. In Louis M. Goldstein, D. H. Whalen & Catherine T. Best (eds.), Laboratory phonology, 241–263. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Ebling, Sarah, Necati Cihan Camgöz, Penny Boyes Braem, Katja Tissi, Sandra Sidler-Miserez, Stephanie Stoll, Simon Hadfield, Tobias Haug, Richard Bowden, Sandrine Tornay, Marzieh Razavi & Mathew Magimai-Doss
2018 SMILE Swiss German Sign Language Dataset. Proceedings of the 11th Language Resources and Evaluation Conference (LREC 2018). Miyazaki, Japan. 4221–4229.Google Scholar
Efthimiou, Eleni, Stavroula-Evita Fotinea, Christian Vogler, Thomas Hanke, John Glauert, Richard Bowden, Annelies Braffort, Christophe Collect, Petros Maragos & Jérémie Segouat
2009 Sign language recognition, generation and modelling: A research effort with applications in Deaf communication. In C. Stephanidis (ed.), Universal access in human-computer interaction, 21–30. Berlin: Springer. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Gries, Stefan
2013 Statistics for linguistics with R: A practical introduction (2nd edition) Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Hall, Matthew L., Victor S. Ferreira & Rachel I. Mayberry
2012 Phonological similarity judgments in ASL: Evidence for maturational constraints on phonetic perception in sign. Sign Language & Linguistics 15(1). 104–127. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Hanke, Thomas
2017 Wörterbuch ohne Wörter? Zum Entstehen eines Wörterbuches der Deutschen Gebärdensprache. In Heidelberger Akademie der Wissenschaften (ed.), Jahrbuch der Heidelberger Akademie der Wissenschaften für 2016, 84–88. Heidelberg: Universitätsverlag Winter.Google Scholar
Hanke, Thomas & Jakob Storz
2008 iLex: A database tool for integrating sign language corpus linguistics and sign language lexicography. Proceedings of the 6th Language Resources and Evaluation Conference (LREC). Marrakech, Morocco. 64–67.Google Scholar
Hildebrandt, Ursula & David Corina
2002 Phonological similarity in American Sign Language. Language and Cognitive Processes 17(6). 593–612. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Lupton, Linda & Howard Zelaznik
1990 Motor learning in sign language students. Sign Language Studies 67(1). 153–174. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Marentette, Paula F. & Rachel I. Mayberry
2000 Principles for an emerging phonological system: A case study of early ASL acquisition. In Charlene Chamberlain, Jill P. Morford & Rachel I. Mayberry (eds.), Language acquisition by eye, 71–90. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Mayberry, Rachel I., Matthew L. Hall & Meghan Zvaigzne
2014 Subjective frequency ratings for 432 ASL signs. Behavior Research Methods 46(2). 526–539. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Meier, Richard, Claude Mauk, Gene Mirus & Kimberly E. Conlin
1998 Motoric constraints on early sign acquisition. In Eve Clark (ed.), The proceedings of the 29th Annual Child Language Research Forum, 63–72. Chicago, IL: Center for the Study of Language and Information.Google Scholar
Mirus, Gene, Christian Rathmann & Richard P. Meier
2001 Proximalization and distalization of sign movement in adult learners. In Valerie Dively, Melanie Metzger, Sarah Taub & Anne Marie Baer (eds.), Signed languages: Discoveries from international research, 103–119. Washington, DC: Gallaudet University Press.Google Scholar
Morford, Jill P. & Martina L. Carlson
2011 Sign perception and recognition in non-native signers of ASL. Language Learning and Development 7(2). 149–168. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Morgan, Gary, Sarah Barrett-Jones & Helen Stoneham
2007 The first signs of language: Phonological development in British Sign Language. Applied Psycholinguistics 28(1). 3–22. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Napoli, Donna Jo, Nathan C. Sanders & Rebecca Wright
2014 On the linguistic effects of articulatory ease, with a focus on sign languages. Language 90(2). 424–456. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Newell, Karl M. & P. Vernon McDonald
1994 Learning to coordinate redundant biomechanical degrees of freedom. In Stephan Swinnen, Herbert Heuer, Jean Massion & Paul Caesar (eds.), Interlimb coordination: Neural, dynamical and cognitive constraints, 515–536. New York: Academic Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Ochs, Elinor
1985 Variation and error: A sociolinguistic approach to language acquisition in Samoa. In Dan I. Slobin (ed.), The crosslinguistic study of language acquisition. Volume 1: The data, 783–838. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Ortega, Gerardo
2013 Acquisition of a signed phonological system by hearing adults: The role of sign structure and iconicity. London: UCL PhD dissertation.Google Scholar
Ortega, Gerardo & Gary Morgan
2010 Comparing child and adult development of a visual phonological system. Language, Interaction and Acquisition 1(1). 67–81. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2015a Phonological development in hearing learners of a sign language: The influence of phonological parameters, sign complexity, and iconicity. Language Learning 65(3). 660–688. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2015b Phonological development in hearing learners of a sign language: The role of sign complexity and iconicity. Language Learning 65(3). 660–668. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Prillwitz, Siegmund, Renata Leven, Horst Zienert, Thomas Hanke & Jan Henning
1989 HamNoSys: Version 2.0: An introductory guide. Hamburg: Signum.Google Scholar
Rosen, Russell S.
2004 Beginning L2 production errors in ASL lexical phonology: A cognitive phonology model. Sign Language & Linguistics 7(1). 31–61. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Sanders, Nathan & Donna Jo Napoli
2016a Reactive effort as a factor that shapes sign language lexicons. Language 92(2). 275–297. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2016b A cross-linguistic preference for torso stability in the lexicon: Evidence from 24 sign languages. Sign Language & Linguistics 19(2). 197–231. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Schlehofer, Deirdre & Isaiah J. Tyler
2016 Errors in second language learners’ production of phonological contrasts in American Sign Language. International Journal of Language and Linguistics 3(2). 30–38.Google Scholar
Siedlecki, Theodore Jr. & John D. Bonvillian
1993 Location, handshape and movement: Young children’s acquisition of the formational aspects of American Sign Language. Sign Language Studies 781. 31–52. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Vinson, David P., Kearsy Cormier, Tanja Denmark, Adam Schembri & Gabriella Vigliocco
2008 The British Sign Language (BSL) norms for age of acquisition, familiarity, and iconicity. Behavior Research Methods 40(4). 1079–1087. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Williams, Joshua & Sharlene Newman
2016 Phonological substitution errors in L2 ASL sentence processing by hearing M2L2 learners. Sage Second Language Research 32(3). 347–366. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Willoughby, Louisa, Stephanie Linder, Kirsten Ellis & Julie Fisher
2015 Errors and feedback in the beginner Auslan classroom. Sign Language Studies 15(3). 322–347. CrossrefGoogle Scholar