Article published in:
Sign Language & Linguistics
Vol. 20:1 (2017) ► pp. 1–26

Describing spatial layouts as an L2M2 signed language learner

| NTNU, Norwegian University of Science and Technology
| NTNU, Norwegian University of Science and Technology
This study explores the L2M2 acquisition of Norwegian Sign Language by hearing adults, with a focus on the production and use of depicting signs. A group of students and their instructors were asked to respond to prompt questions about directions and locations in Norwegian Sign Language, and their responses were then compared. An examination of the students’ depicting signs shows that they struggled more with the phonological parameters orientation and movement, rather than with handshape. In addition, they used fewer depicting signs than their instructors, and instead relied more on lexical signs. Finally, students were found to struggle with the coordination of depicting signs within the signing space and in relation to their own bodies. It is hoped that the findings from this study can be used to inform future research as well as curricula development and pedagogy.
Keywords: depicting signs, classifier predicates, Norwegian Sign Language, L2 acquisition, M2 acquisition


This article is currently available as a sample article.

Published online: 06 November 2017
https://doi.org/10.1075/sll.20.1.01fer

Full-text

Describing spatial layouts as an L2M2 signed language learner
References

References

Alberdi, Lourdes Calle, Lorraine Leeson & Marinella Salami
2013 Learning outcomes for graduates of a three-year interpreting training programme. Bedfordshire, Great Britain: European Forum of Sign Language Interpreters & EU Lifelong Learning Programme. http://​efsli​.org​/publications​/shop/ [accessed 23 February 2017].
Baus, Cristina, Manuel Carreiras & Karen Emmorey
2013 When does iconicity in sign language matter? Language and Cognitive Processes 28(3). 261–271. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Beuzeville, Louise de
2006 Visual and linguistic representation in the acquisition of depicting verbs: a study of native signing deaf children of Auslan (Australian Sign Language). Newcastle, Australia: University of Newcastle PhD dissertation.Google Scholar
Biber, Douglas & Susan Conrad
2011 Corpus linguistics and grammar teaching. Available from http://​longmanhomeusa​.com​/content​/pl​_biber​_conrad​_monograph5​_lo​.pdf [accessed 23 February 2017].
Bochner, Joseph H., Karen Christie, Peter C. Hauser & J. Matt Searls
2011 When is a difference really different? Learners’ discrimination of linguistic contrasts in American Sign Language. Language Learning 61(4). 1302–1327. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Boers-Visker, Eveline & Beppie van den Bogaerde
2015 Use of space in five L2 learners of Sign Language of the Netherlands (NGT). Paper presented at the 2nd International Conference on Sign Language Acquisition , Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Bogaerde, Beppie van den & Anne Baker
2005 Code mixing in mother-child interaction in deaf families. Sign Language & Linguistics 8(1/2). 151–174. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Boyes Braem, Penny
1990 Acquisition of the handshape in American Sign Language: A preliminary analysis. In Virginia Volterra & Carol Erting (eds.), From gesture to language in hearing and deaf children, 107–127. Berlin: Springer Verlag. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Chen Pichler, Deborah
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
Cormier, Kearsy, David Quinto-Pozos, Zed Sevcikova & Adam Schembri
2012 Lexicalisation and de-lexicalisation processes in sign languages: Comparing depicting constructions and viewpoint gestures. Language and Communication 32(4). 329–348. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
[ p. 24 ]
Crasborn, Onno & Han Sloetjes
2008 Enhanced ELAN functionality for sign language corpora. In Onno Crasborn, Eleni Efthimiou, Thomas Hanke, Ernst D. Thoutenhoofd & Inge Zwitserlood (eds.), The third workshop on the representation and processing of sign languages: Construction and exploitation of sign language corpora [a workshop given at the Sixth International Conference on Language Resources and Evaluation, 26 May – 1 June 2008, Marrakech, Morocco], 39–43. Paris: European Language Resources Association. Retrieved from http://​www​.lrec​-conf​.org​/lrec2008 [accessed 23 February 2017].
Cresdee, Donovan & Trevor Johnston
2014 Using corpus-based research to inform the teaching of Auslan (Australian Sign Language) as a second language. In David McKee, Russell S. Rosen & Rachel McKee (eds.), Teaching and learning signed languages: International perspectives and practices, 85–110. London, England: Palgrave Macmillan. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Cuxac, Christian
1999 The expression of spatial relations and the spatialization of semantic representations in French Sign Language. In Catherine Fuchs & Stéphan Robert (eds.), Language diversity and cognitive representations, 123–142. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Emmorey, Karen, Barbara Tversky & Holly Taylor
2000 Using space to describe space: Perspective in speech, sign, and gesture. Spatial Cognition and Computation 2(3). 157–180. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Ferrara, Lindsay
In preparation. Multimodal coherence: Eye gaze and body orientation in the depiction of locations and spatial relations by L2M2 signers of Norwegian Sign Language.
Forus, Anne
2012 Genetiske årsaker til medfødt døvhet (Nyheter-Doktoravhandlinger). [Genetic reasons for congenital deafness (News-PhD dissertations)]. Tidsskrift for Den norske legeforening 21. 132. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Fuller, Donald R. & Ronnie B. Wilbur
1987 The effect of visual metaphor cueing on recall of phonologically similar signs. Sign Language Studies 54(Spring). 59–80. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Hilger, Allison I., Torrey M. J. Loucks, David Quinto-Pozos & Matthew W. G. Dye
2015 Second language acquisition across modalities: Production variability in adult L2 learners of American Sign Language. Second Language Research 31(3). 375–388. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Hoemann, Harry W. & Linda S. Blama
1992 Memory span for signs & digits forward & backward in beginning level ASL students. Sign Language Studies 76(Fall). 277–284. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Hoemann, Harry W. & Catherine M. Keske
1994 Proactive interference & language change in hearing adult students of American Sign Language. Sign Language Studies 86(Spring). 45–62. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Janzen, Terry
2012 Lexicalization and grammaticalization. In Roland Pfau, Markus Steinbach & Bencie Woll (eds.), Sign Languages: An international handbook, 816–481. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Johnston, Trevor
2016 Auslan corpus annotation guidelines. Manuscript. Macquarie University. Sydney. Retrieved from http://​new​.auslan​.org​.au​/about​/annotations/ [accessed 23 February 2017].
Johnston, Trevor & Lindsay Ferrara
2012 Lexicalization in signed languages: When an idiom is not an idiom. Selected Papers from UK-CLA Meetings, 1. 229–248. http://​www​.uk​-cla​.org​.uk​/proceedings​/volume​_1​/21​-17
[ p. 25 ]
Johnston, Trevor & Adam Schembri
1999 On defining lexeme in a signed language. Sign Language & Linguistics 2(2). 115–185. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2007 Australian Sign Language: An introduction to sign language linguistics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2010 Variation, lexicalization and grammaticalization in signed languages. Langage et Société 131(March). 19–35. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Klima, Edward & Ursula Bellugi
1979 The signs of language. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Leeson, Lorraine, Lourdes Calle Alberdi & Sarah Brown
2013 Assessment guidelines for sign language interpreting training programmes. Madrid, Spain: European Forum of Sign Language Interpreters & EU Lifelong Learning Programme. http://​efsli​.org​/publications​/shop/ [accessed 23 February 2017].
Liddell, Scott K.
2003 Grammar, gesture, and meaning in American Sign Language. New York: Cambridge University Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Lupton, Linda K. & Macalyne Fristoe
1992 Sign vocabulary recognition in students of American Sign Language. Sign Language Studies 76(Fall). 215–232. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Marshall, Chloë R. & Gary Morgan
2014 From gesture to sign language: Conventionalization of classifier constructions by adult hearing learners of British Sign Language. Topics in Cognitive Science. 1–20. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
McIntire, Marina L. & Judy S. Reilly
1988 Nonmanual behaviors in L1 & L2 learners of American Sign Language. Sign Language Studies 61(Winter). 351–375. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
McKee, David, Russell S. Rosen & Rachel McKee
(eds.) 2014 Teaching and learning signed languages. International perspectives and practices. London: Palgrave Macmillan. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Mills, Carol Bergfeld
1984 Factors influencing manual sign learning in hearing adults. Sign Language Studies 44(Fall). 261–278. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Mills, Carol Bergfeld & Linda J. Weldon
1983 Effects of semantic and cheremic context on acquisition of manual signs. Memory & Cognition 11(1). 93–100. Crossref.Google Scholar
Mirus, Gene, Christian Rathmann & Richard Meier
2001 Proximilization 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
Morgan, Gary & Bencie Woll
(eds.) 2002 Directions in sign language acquisition. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Nilsson, Anna-Lena & Lindsay Ferrara
2015 Depicting from experience: Learning to give directions in space. Paper presented at the 5th Conference of the Scandinavian Association for Language and Cognition (SALC V) , NTNU, Trondheim, Norway.
2016 Meaningful use of space: Easy or hard for hearing L2 learners? Poster presented at Theoretical Issues in Sign Language Research 12 , La Trobe University, Melbourne, Australia.Google Scholar
Ortega, Gerardo & Gary Morgan
2015 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
[ p. 26 ]
Perniss, Pamela, Inge Zwitserlood & Aslı Özyürek
2015 Does space structure spatial language?: A comparison of spatial expression across sign languages. Language 91(3), 611–641. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Petitto, Laura Anne & Paula F. Marentette
1991 Babbling in the manual mode: Evidence for the ontogeny of language. Science 251. 1483–1496. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Rosen, Russell S.
2004 Beginning L2 production errors in ASL lexical phonology. Sign Language & Linguistics 7(1). 31–61. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Schembri, Adam, Caroline Jones & Denis Burnham
2005 Comparing action gestures and classifier verbs of motion: Evidence from Australian Sign Language, Taiwan Sign Language, and nonsigners’ gestures without speech. Journal of Deaf Studies and Deaf Education 10(3). 272–290. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Supalla, Ted
2003 Revisiting visual analogy in ASL classifier predicates. In Emmorey, Karen (ed.), Perspectives on classifier constructions in sign languages, 249–257. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google 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
Zwitserlood, Inge, Pamela Perniss & Aslı Özyürek
2012 An empirical investigation of the expression of multiple entities in Turkish Sign Language (TİD): Considering the effects of modality. Lingua 122. 1636–1667. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Cited by

Cited by 7 other publications

BOERS–VISKER, EVELINE & ROLAND PFAU
2020. Space Oddities: The Acquisition of Agreement Verbs by L2 Learners of Sign Language of the Netherlands. The Modern Language Journal 104:4 ► pp. 757 ff. Crossref logo
Ferrara, Lindsay
2019. Coordinating signs and eye gaze in the depiction of directions and spatial scenes by fluent and L2 signers of Norwegian Sign Language. Spatial Cognition & Computation 19:3 ► pp. 220 ff. Crossref logo
Gulamani, Sannah, Chloë Marshall & Gary Morgan
2020. The challenges of viewpoint-taking when learning a sign language: Data from the ‘frog story’ in British Sign Language. Second Language Research ► pp. 026765832090685 ff. Crossref logo
Kurz, Kim B., Kellie Mullaney & Corrine Occhino
2019. Constructed Action in American Sign Language: A Look at Second Language Learners in a Second Modality. Languages 4:4 ► pp. 90 ff. Crossref logo
Mesch, Johanna & Krister Schönström
2020. Use and acquisition of mouth actions in L2 sign language learners. Sign Language & Linguistics Crossref logo
Nilsson, Anna-Lena
2018. Expressing time through space. Translation and Interpreting Studies 13:1 ► pp. 6 ff. Crossref logo
Perniss, Pamela, David Vinson & Gabriella Vigliocco
2020. Making Sense of the Hands and Mouth: The Role of “Secondary” Cues to Meaning in British Sign Language and English. Cognitive Science 44:7 Crossref logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 14 december 2020. 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.