Cover not available
Article published In:
Sign Language & Linguistics
Vol. 24:1 (2021) ► pp.4–35

Phonological priming in German Sign Language

An eye tracking study using the Visual World Paradigm

 | University of Hamburg
 | Johann Wolfgang Goethe University
 | Georg-August-University
 | University of Hamburg
 | Georg-August-University
A number of studies provide evidence for a phonological priming effect in the recognition of single signs based on phonological parameters and that the specific phonological parameters modulated in the priming effect can influence the robustness of this effect. This eye tracking study on German Sign Language examined phonological priming effects at the sentence level, while varying the phonological relationship between prime-target sign pairs. We recorded participants’ eye movements while presenting videos of sentences containing either related or unrelated prime-target sign pairs, and pictures of the target and an unrelated distractor. We observed a phonological priming effect for sign pairs sharing handshape and movement while differing in location parameter. Taken together, the data suggest a difference in the contribution of sign parameters to sign recognition and that sub-lexical features influence sign language processing.
Keywords: German Sign Language, eye tracking, Visual World Paradigm, sentence processing, phonological priming
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
    • 1.1Effects of phonological parameters
    • 1.2Eye tracking studies in sign languages
    • 1.3The present study
  • 2.Methods
    • 2.1Participants
    • 2.2Material
    • 2.3Procedure
  • 3.Results
  • 4.Discussion
  • 5.Conclusion
  • Acknowledgements
  • Notes
  • References
Published online: 15 December 2020
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/sll.19011.wie
References (60)
References
Battison, Robbin. 1974. Phonological deletion in American Sign Language. Sign Language Studies 5(1). 1–19. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Baus, Cristina, Eva Gutiérrez & Manuel Carreiras. 2014. The role of syllables in sign language production. Frontiers in Psychology 5(1254). DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Baus, Cristina, Eva Gutiérrez-Sigut, Josep Quer & Manuel Carreiras. 2008. Lexical access in Catalan Sign Language (LSC) production. Cognition 108(3). 856–865. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Brentari, Diane. 2006. Effects of language modality on word segmentation: An experimental study of phonological factors in a sign language. In Louis Goldstein, Douglas H. Whalen & Catherine T. Best (eds.), Laboratory Phonology, vol. 81, 155–164. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton.Google Scholar
Carreiras, Manuel. 2010. Sign language processing. Language and Linguistics Compass 4(7). 430–444. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Carreiras, Manuel, Eva Gutiérrez-Sigut, Silvia Baquero & David P. Corina. 2008. Lexical processing in Spanish Sign Language (LSE). Journal of Memory and Language 58(1). 100–122. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Caselli, Naomi K. & Ariel M. Cohen-Goldberg. 2014. Lexical access in sign language: a computational model. Frontiers in Psychology 5(428). DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Chen, Qi & Daniel Mirman. 2012. Competition and cooperation among similar representations: toward a unified account of facilitative and inhibitory effects of lexical neighbors. Psychological Review 119(2). 417–430. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Clark, Lorene E. & François Grosjean. 1982. Sign recognition processes in American Sign Language: The effect of context. Language and Speech 25(4). 325–340. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cooper, Roger M. 1974. The control of eye fixation by the meaning of spoken language: A new methodology for the real-time investigation of speech perception, memory, and language processing. Cognitive Psychology 6(1). 84–107. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Corina, David P. & Ursula C. Hildebrandt. 2002. Psycholinguistic investigations of phonological structure in ASL. In Richard P. Meier, Kearsy Cormier & David Quinto-Pozos (eds.), Modality and structure in signed and spoken languages, 88–111. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Crasborn, Onno & Els van der Kooij. 1997. Relative orientation in sign language phonology. In Jane Coerts & Heleen de Hoop (eds.), Linguistics in the Netherlands 1997, 37–48. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Crystal, David. 2008. Dictionary of linguistics and phonetics (6th ed.). Malden, MA: Blackwell Publishing. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Dink, Jacob W. & Brock Ferguson. 2015. eyetrackingR: An R library for eye-tracking data analysis. [URL]
Dye, Matthew W. G. & Shui-I. Shih. 2006. Phonological priming in British Sign Language. In Louis Goldstein, Douglas H. Whalen & Catherine T. Best (eds.), Laboratory Phonology, vol. 81, 243–263. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton.Google Scholar
Emmorey, Karen & David P. Corina. 1990. Lexical recognition in sign language: Effects of phonetic structure and morphology. Perceptual and Motor Skills 71(3). 1227–1252. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Emmorey, Karen, Robin L. Thompson & Rachael Colvin. 2009. Eye gaze during comprehension of American Sign Language by native and beginning signers. Journal of Deaf Studies and Deaf Education 14(2). 237–243. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Grosjean, François. 1980. Sign and word recognition: a first comparison. Sign Language Studies 321. 195–220. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Gutiérrez, Eva, Oliver Müller, Cristina Baus & Manuel Carreiras. 2012. Electrophysiological evidence for phonological priming in Spanish Sign Language lexical access. Neuropsychologia 50(7). 1335–1346. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Gutiérrez, Eva, Deborah Williams, Michael Grosvald & David P. Corina. 2012. Lexical access in American Sign Language: An ERP investigation of effects of semantics and phonology. Brain Research 14681. 63–83. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hanna, Joy E. & Michael K. Tanenhaus. 2004. Pragmatic effects on reference resolution in a collaborative task: evidence from eye movements. Cognitive Science 28(1). 105–115. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Happ, Daniela & Marc-Oliver Vorköper. 2006. Deutsche Gebärdensprache: Ein Lehr-und Arbeitsbuch. Frankfurt/Main: Fachhochschulverlag.Google Scholar
Hildebrandt, Ursula & David P. Corina. 2002. Phonological similarity in American Sign Language. Language and Cognitive Processes 17(6). 593–612. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hillinger, Michael L. 1980. Priming effects with phonemically similar words. Memory & Cognition 8(2). 115–123. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hosemann, Jana. 2011. Eye gaze and verb agreement in German Sign Language: A first glance. Sign Language & Linguistics 14(1). 76–93. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hosemann, Jana, Annika Herrmann, Markus Steinbach, Ina Bornkessel-Schlesewsky & Matthias Schlesewsky. 2013. Lexical prediction via forward models: N400 evidence from German Sign Language. Neuropsychologia 51(11). 2224–2237. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hosemann, Jana, Nivedita Mani, Annika Herrmann, Markus Steinbach & Nicole Altvater-Mackensen. 2020. Signs activate their written word translation in deaf adults: An ERP study on cross-modal co-activation in German Sign Language. Glossa: a Journal of General Linguistics 5(1). DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Just, Marcel A. & Patricia A. Carpenter. 1980. A theory of reading: From eye fixations to comprehension. Psychological Review 87(4). 329–354. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kenstowicz, Michael & Charles Kisseberth. 1979. Generative phonology: Description and theory. New York, NY: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Klima, Edward S. & Ursula Bellugi. 1979. The signs of language. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Kubus, Okan, Agnes Villwock, Jill P. Morford & Christian Rathmann. 2015. Word recognition in deaf readers: Cross-language activation of German Sign Language and German. Applied Psycholinguistics 36(4). 831–854. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Liddell, Scott K. 1984. think and believe: Sequentiality in American Sign Language. Language 60(2). 372–399. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Liddell, Scott K. & Robert E. Johnson. 1989. American Sign Language: The phonological base. Sign Language Studies 64(1). 195–277. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lieberman, Amy M., Arielle Borovsky, Marla Hatrak & Rachel I. Mayberry. 2015. Real-time processing of ASL signs: Delayed first language acquisition affects organization of the mental lexicon. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition 41(4). 1130–1139. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lieberman, Amy M., Arielle Borovsky & Rachel I. Mayberry. 2017. Prediction in a visual language: real-time sentence processing in American Sign Language across development. Language, Cognition and Neuroscience 1–15. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Mayberry, Rachel I. & Pamela Witcher. 2005. What age of acquisition effects reveal about the nature of phonological processing. Center for Research in Language Technical Reports 17(3). 3–9.Google Scholar
Meade, Gabriela, Brittany Lee, Katherine J. Midgley, Phillip J. Holcomb & Karen Emmorey. 2018. Phonological and semantic priming in American Sign Language: N300 and N400 effects. Language, Cognition and Neuroscience 33(9). 1092–1106. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Meade, Gabriela, Katherine J. Midgley, Zed Sevcikova Sehyr, Phillip J. Holcomb & Karen Emmorey. 2017. Implicit co-activation of American Sign Language in deaf readers: An ERP study. Brain and Language 1701. 50–61. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Melinger, Alissa & Andrea Weber. 2006. Database of noun associations for German. [URL]
Morford, Jill P., Erin Wilkinson, Agnes Villwock, Pilar Piñar & Judith F. Kroll. 2011. When deaf signers read English: Do written words activate their sign translations? Cognition 118(2). 286–292. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Morgan, Gary, Sarah Barrett-Jones & Helen Stoneham. 2007. The first signs of language: Phonological development in British Sign Language. Applied Psycholinguistics 28(01). 3–22. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Orfanidou, Eleni, Robert Adam, James M. McQueen & Gary Morgan. 2009. Making sense of nonsense in British Sign Language (BSL): The contribution of different phonological parameters to sign recognition. Memory & Cognition 37(3). 302–315. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ormel, Ellen, Daan Hermans, Harry Knoors & Ludo Verhoeven. 2012. Cross-language effects in written word recognition: The case of bilingual deaf children. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition 15(2). 288–303. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Perniss, Pamela M. 2007. Space and iconicity in German Sign Language (DGS). Nijmegen, Netherlands: Radboud University PhD dissertation. [URL]
Pfau, Roland. 1997. Zur phonologischen Komponente der Deutschen Gebärdensprache: Segmente und Silben. Frankfurter Linguistische Forschungen 201. 1–29.Google Scholar
Pfau, Roland & Josep Quer. 2010. Nonmanuals: their grammatical and prosodic roles. In Diane Brentari (ed.), Sign languages (Cambridge Language Surveys), 381–402. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Radeau, Monique, José Morais & Juan Segui. 1995. Phonological priming between monosyllabic spoken words. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance 21(6). 1297–1310. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Sandler, Wendy. 1986. The spreading hand autosegment of American Sign Language. Sign Language Studies 50(1). 1–28. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Sandler, Wendy & Diane Lillo-Martin. 2006. Sign language and linguistic universals. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Siedlecki Jr, Theodore & John D. Bonvillian. 1993. Location, handshape & movement: Young children’s acquisition of the formational aspects of American Sign Language. Sign Language Studies 78(1). 31–52. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Slowiaczek, Louisa M. & MaryBeth Hamburger. 1992. Prelexical facilitation and lexical interference in auditory word recognition. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition 18(6). 1239–1250. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Slowiaczek, Louisa M., James M. McQueen, Emily G. Soltano & Michelle Lynch. 2000. Phonological representations in prelexical speech processing: Evidence from form-based priming. Journal of Memory and Language 43(3). 530–560. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Slowiaczek, Louisa M. & David B. Pisoni. 1986. Effects of phonological similarity on priming in auditory lexical decision. Memory & Cognition 14(3). 230–237. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Stokoe, William C. 1960. Sign language structure: An outline of the visual communication systems of the American Deaf (Studies in Linguistics. Occasional Papers 8). Buffalo, NY: University of Buffalo Press [Re-issued 2005, Journal of Deaf Studies and Deaf Education 10(1), 3–37].Google Scholar
Stokoe, William C., Dorothy C. Casterline & Carl G. Croneberg. 1965. A dictionary of American Sign Language on linguistic principles. Washington, D.C.: Gallaudet College Press.Google Scholar
Tanenhaus, Michael K., Michael J. Spivey-Knowlton, Kathleen M. Eberhard & Julie C. Sedivy. 1995. Integration of visual and linguistic information in spoken language comprehension. Science 268(5217). 1632–1634. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Thompson, Robin L., Karen Emmorey & Tamar H. Gollan. 2005. “Tip of the fingers” experiences by Deaf signers. Insights into the organization of a sign-based lexicon. Psychological Science 16(11). 856–860. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Thompson, Robin L., Karen Emmorey & Robert Kluender. 2006. The relationship between eye gaze and verb agreement in American Sign Language: an eye-tracking study. Natural Language & Linguistic Theory 24(2). 571–604. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Thompson, Robin L., David Vinson, Neil Fox & Gabriella Vigliocco. 2013. Is lexical access driven by temporal order or perceptual salience? Evidence from British Sign Language. Proceedings of the 35th Annual Meeting of the Cognitive Science Society 35(35). 1450–1455.Google Scholar
Twilhaar, Jan N. & Beppie van den Bogaerde. 2016. Concise lexicon for sign linguistics. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cited by (2)

Cited by two other publications

Geraci, Carlo, Lena Pasalskaya & Sharon Peperkamp
2024. Sign recognition: the effect of parameters and features in sign mispronunciations. Linguistics Vanguard DOI logo
Rubio-Fernandez, Paula, Anne Wienholz, Carey M. Ballard, Simon Kirby & Amy M. Lieberman
2022. Adjective position and referential efficiency in American Sign Language: Effects of adjective semantics, sign type and age of sign exposure. Journal of Memory and Language 126 ► pp. 104348 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 29 december 2024. 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.