Two studies investigated the ramifications of encoding spatial locations via signing space for perspective choice in American Sign Language. Deaf signers (speakers) described the location of one of two identical objects either to a present addressee or to a remote addressee via a video monitor. Unlike what has been found for English speakers, ASL signers did not adopt their addressees spatial perspective when describing locations in a jointly viewed present environment; rather, they produced spatial descriptions utilizing shared space in which classifier and deictic signs were articulated at locations in signing space that schematically mapped to both the speakers and addressees view of object locations within the (imagined) environment. When the speaker and addressee were not jointly viewing the environment, speakers either adopted their addressees perspective via referential shift (i.e. locations in signing space were described as if the speaker were the addressee) or speakers expressed locations from their own perspective by describing locations from their view of a map of the environment and the addressees position within that environment. The results highlight crucial distinctions between the nature of perspective choice in signed languages in which signing space is used to convey spatial information and spoken languages in which spatial information is conveyed by lexical spatial terms. English speakers predominantly reduce their addressees cognitive load by adopting their addressees perspective, whereas in ASL shared space can be used (there is no true addressee or speaker perspective) and in other contexts, reversing speaker perspective is common in ASL and does not increase the addressees cognitive load.
2025. Individual differences in spatial navigation. In Encyclopedia of the Human Brain, ► pp. 277 ff.
Quinto‐Pozos, David, Taylor Renee Joyce, Abhra Sarkar, Michael DiLeo & Lynn Hou
2023. L2 Learners’ Signed Language Processing Relates, in Part, to Perspective‐Taking Skills. Language Learning 73:S1 ► pp. 64 ff.
Gulamani, Sannah, Chloë Marshall & Gary Morgan
2022. The challenges of viewpoint-taking when learning a sign language: Data from the ‘frog story’ in British Sign Language. Second Language Research 38:1 ► pp. 55 ff.
Dobel, Christian, Bettina Nestler-Collatz, Orlando Guntinas-Lichius, Stefan R. Schweinberger & Romi Zäske
2020. Deaf signers outperform hearing non-signers in recognizing happy facial expressions. Psychological Research 84:6 ► pp. 1485 ff.
MAKAROĞLU, Bahtiyar
2020. TÜRK İŞARET DİLİNDE GÖNDERİMSELLİK VE İŞARET ALANI. Dil Dergisi 1:171 ► pp. 9 ff.
Slonimska, Anita, Asli Özyürek & Olga Capirci
2020. The role of iconicity and simultaneity for efficient communication: The case of Italian Sign Language (LIS). Cognition 200 ► pp. 104246 ff.
Brozdowski, Chris, Kristen Secora & Karen Emmorey
2019. Assessing the Comprehension of Spatial Perspectives in ASL Classifier Constructions. The Journal of Deaf Studies and Deaf Education 24:3 ► pp. 214 ff.
Secora, Kristen & Karen Emmorey
2019. Social Abilities and Visual-Spatial Perspective-Taking Skill: Deaf Signers and Hearing Nonsigners. The Journal of Deaf Studies and Deaf Education 24:3 ► pp. 201 ff.
Secora, Kristen & Karen Emmorey
2020. Visual-Spatial Perspective-Taking in Spatial Scenes and in American Sign Language. The Journal of Deaf Studies and Deaf Education 25:4 ► pp. 447 ff.
Hauser, Peter C., Raylene Paludneviciene, Wanda Riddle, Kim B. Kurz, Karen Emmorey & Jessica Contreras
2016. American Sign Language Comprehension Test: A Tool for Sign Language Researchers. Journal of Deaf Studies and Deaf Education 21:1 ► pp. 64 ff.
Pyers, Jennie E., Pamela Perniss & Karen Emmorey
2015. Viewpoint in the Visual-Spatial Modality: The Coordination of Spatial Perspective. Spatial Cognition & Computation 15:3 ► pp. 143 ff.
Emmorey, Karen
2012. The psycholinguistics of signed and spoken languages: how biology affects processing. In The Oxford Handbook of Psycholinguistics, ► pp. 703 ff.
Dobel, C., S. Enriquez-Geppert, M. Hummert, P. Zwitserlood & J. Bolte
2011. Conceptual Representation of Actions in Sign Language. Journal of Deaf Studies and Deaf Education 16:3 ► pp. 392 ff.
2008. The onset and mastery of spatial language in children acquiring British Sign Language. Cognitive Development 23:1 ► pp. 1 ff.
This list is based on CrossRef data as of 27 september 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.