Comparative Analysis of the Production of Non-Manual Grammatical Signals Between Native and Late Learners by Rebecca Orton for LIN781 Guided Research Project May, 1999
Introduction
According to Lucas and Valli (1989, 1992), contact sign has non-manual grammatical signal differences between native Deaf ASL signers and hearing signers. Namely, the most noticeable differences are the absence of some non-manual grammatical signals with in contact sign. While extrapolating from this research, I noticed that there were no late signers with a hearing loss involved in this study. There were no comparisons made between native Deaf ASL signers and late signers with a hearing loss, only betw een Deaf ASL signers and hearing signers. The following questions appeared to be unanswered. Could non-manual grammatical signals be produced differently by a late learner with a hearing loss? Is there meaning or form differences within non-manual gram matical signals produced by a late signer with a hearing loss? Are there significant differences in non-manual grammatical signals between native Deaf ASL users and late users with hearing loss? Is there an alternative form produced by a late signer wit h a hearing loss? If these questions are answered in such a way that contact sign appears to be nothing more than characteristic of late acquisition of ASL, then perhaps there is no "contact" signing between the two languages concerned, namely English and ASL. If this is the case, then the label "contact sign" is just as inappropriate as the label "Pidgin Signed English" or PSE. A situation applicable to contact between ASL and English would be where a hearing native English person needs to communicate with a deaf native ASL person. But a person with a hearing loss whose first primary language was English, and later depends on ASL as a primary language is no longer in a contact situation. Would the label "contact sign" still be applicable for what the deaf late signer uses? Furthermore, what if these deaf late signers had deaf children of their own that learned to sign from their parents? What would the nativization of this kind of signing by children look like? Who knows? At any rate, the supposed contact between ASL and English in "contact sign" doesn't exist at this point where nativization occurs. Why focus on non-manual grammatical signals and not some other common aspect of contact sign and ASL? English has no grammatical non-manual signals. It is true that manual gestures may be used as part of the English discourse and these gestures are inde ed seen visually and not heard aurally. However, gestures are not used to mark grammatical constituents in English. A hearing native English-speaking person that learned to sign later as an adult may not depend on a visual mode of communication as heavily as a deaf late signer. The deaf late signer has to depend on a more visual mode of living and communicating. This is the case for both late deafened signers and for oral deaf signers. An oral deaf late signer may speak and understand spoken English natively but this may have been most likely achieved through a more visual means, such as lip-reading. There are two possibilities when using a group of hearing late signers supposedly using contact sign and a group of deaf late signers. The first possibility is that the deaf late signer may has missing non-manual grammatical signals in their signing, jus t like a hearing person using contact sign would. Then there is no problem concluding that contact sign appears to be nothing more than signing characteristic of late acquisition of ASL. The second possibility is that there may be differences between the production of NMS in contact sign by a hearing person and what a deaf late signer would use. In this second case, we couldn't rule out a heavier reliance on a visual mode of communicatio n as a contributing factor between the hearing late signers and the deaf late signers. The study would then be inconclusive with respect to the production of NMS characteristic of contact sign and NMS characteristic of late ASL acquisition. By having two groups of deaf subjects, one group of native ASL signers and the other group of late signers, heavier reliance on a visual mode of communication is ruled out as a contributing factor to any differences found between the production of NMS in signing characteristic of late ASL acquisition and in contact sign. This research project unifies two other lines of research, not just on contact sign research. One line of research focused on the control and spread of non-manual grammatical signals among native signers. There is plenty of research regarding non-manual signals and their role in marking the grammatical constituents of ASL, for example, Baker-Shenk (1983), Aarons, Bahan, Kegl, and Neidle (1992), Aarons (1994), and Bahan (1996). The other line of research focused on how age plays a role in the acquisition of ASL. Mayberry (1991) has suggested that there is a relationship between performance in the production of a language and age of acquisition of a language. She basically supp orts the idea that the older one acquires a language, the lower one's performance level is for that language. This relationship may have something to do with the critical period of language acquisition hypothesized by Lenneberg (1967). However, Mayberry focused on subjects that did not have any first language acquisition during the early childhood years when the critical period is supposedly activated. In contrast, my study focused on subjects that have already acquired a first langua ge natively, either English or ASL. Deaf ASL signers are natively fluent in ASL as their first language. Late signers with a hearing loss are natively fluent in English as their first language. In spite of this qualification, this pilot study did find a correlation between performance and age of acquisition with respect to the production of non-manual grammatical signals. The first reason why this research project was set up is, of course, to contribute to the continued expansion of the research field on non-manual grammatical signals to the extent possible within this small pilot study. The second reason was to find out if there are any significant differences in the production of non-manual grammatical signals between deaf native users of American Sign Language and deaf late users. This research has some bearing on contact sign research and on teaching strategies for s econd language learners of American Sign Language.Methodology
As a result of my curiosity and fascination with non manual signals and contact sign, this guided research project for my master's degree was set up with the help of Dr. Ben Bahan as my research advisor. This project focused on three specific non-manual grammatical signals (NMS), wh-q, y/n-q, and negation NMS. According to Jackson, Orton, and Un in our research paper for Sociolinguistics of American Deaf People class, wh-q NMS are: "squinted eyebrows, head tilt, torso shift forward, and eyegaze to the receiver (Baker- Shenk 1983:78, Wilbur, 1994:221-240)." y/n-q NMS are: "...raised eyebrows, 'widened eyes', head tilt forward, torso shift forward, and eyegaze to the receiver (Baker-Shenk 1983:76, Liddell 1980:20, Wilbur, 1994:221-240)." and negation NMS are: "Negation has NMS of squinted eyebrows, side-to-side headshake, wrinkled nose, raised upper lip, and a frown (Bahan 1996:340, Baker-Shenk 1983:80)." The signs HOW, WHAT, WHO, WHERE, WHEN, WHY, WHICH, and WH-generic ("WHAT") are used to form wh-questions, but the wh-q NMS alone can signal a wh-question as well. If an answer to a question is expected to be an affirmative yes or a negative no, these q uestions are y/n questions. Negative sentences are those with negation signs such as CAN'T, WON'T, NO, NONE, DUNNO, etc. and have negation NMS associated with those signs. Two native Deaf ASL signers and two late signers with hearing loss were used within this research study. There was a female native signer and a female late signer. There was a male native signer and a male late signer as well. One gender difference di d show up in the data. It looked like the male signers tended to use more questions than the females. Whether or not this is a significant finding is debatable. A late signer was defined as a person that had 5 years worth of signing experience and star ted to depend on sign language after the age of 10 for communicative functions vital to their life. Videotaped background information of each subject was collected and transcribed. The subject were videotaped while signing an invented short story "Mallard Duck Farm Story". This short story included targeted non-manual grammatical features, namely wh-q uestions, yes/no questions, and negation within the dialogue between characters. During the background information collection portion of the videotaping, the subjects used their own preference for signing, but during the production of the story, the sign ers were requested to use ASL. ASL was the target language of the story, even so, there was still some Signing Exact English (SEE) influence anyway. The production of the story by the 4 signers was transcribed with respect to the manual signs, which of the three NMS concerned were produced, and the spread of these NMS over the manual signs. Spreading of NMS in sign language is used to mark the relevant constituents of the signed utterance. For example, Dr. Ben Bahan's (1996) dissertation focused on NM S spreading over subjects and objects. Head tilt marked the subject and eye gaze marked the object. There was a problem with the methodology that wasn't realized until the videotape data was already collected. Later analysis of the videotape revealed interference with the production of the story by the signers. As a memory aid during the signing of t he story, two of the signers looked at a handout of this story and one signer looked at a bulletin board with the story written on it. Only one signer produced the story totally from memory. These arrangements created interference with the production of the story in several ways. The video production was affected, for example, where the signer would look down at the handout and slightly obscure the facial NMS from the camcorder. There were other kinds of interference. One signer used WH-generic as fi ller while he looked at the handout. Another signer paused his signing while reading the bulletin board. This research study is a pilot study with only 4 subjects. A future in-depth study on this topic should avoid these methodology problems and incorporate a larger group of subjects. Dr. Ben Bahan and I had originally intended to input the videotaped stories into a digitizing program on a multi-media capable computer. The resulting digital movies would have been imported into a product called SignStream in a form of a searchable data base. (The SignStream software product was produced by Bahan, Foelsche, Greenfield, Kegl, MacLaughlin, and Neidle at Dartmouth College, Boston University and Rutgers University. For further information about this product, see the following URL http://www.bu.edu/asllrp/SignStream.) The sign language and non-manual grammatical signals within the digital movies would have been transcribed with SignStream transcription tools and novel sequencing and display technology. With the SignStream product, the ana lysis of non-manual grammatical signals would have been made a lot easier. A preliminary trial run through this process was satisfying successful. We were able to load an ASL poem I had created and signed into SignStream. I found out that using SignStr eam to analyze some of my NMS was comparatively easier than the old fashioned way of using a big screen TV and a VCR with hand controllable speeds for hand-written transcription and analysis. However, a computer devoted to this process was unavailable du e to delays in ordering one after finding out that the computer meant to be used for this process was not technologically capable enough. So, the old fashioned way of transcription was used for this study.Analysis
Baby Mallard Duck's First Reaction to Missing Mother
The male late signer started his wh-q NMS about half-way through the sign LOOK-AROUND in the example below. This anticipation does not affect wh-q NMS spreading over the wh-question sentence itself in a deleterious way. male late signer -----------------wh-q LOOK-AROUND, MOTHER WHERE? The female late signer did not have any negation NMS for NOT in the sentence below. It is also difficult to determine if the "WHAT" was meant to be a "WELL" or a "WHAT" without wh-q NMS. female late signer REALIZE ITS MOTHER NOT AROUND, "WHAT" The male native signer has wh-q NMS over the wh-question with anticipation and preservation in the example below. There wasn't any negation NMS over NONE. male native signer -----------------wh-q-------- LOOK, WHERE'S MOTHER? NONE... The female native signer has wh-q NMS over a discourse marker DUCK as well as over the wh-question, but the wh-q NMS was dropped in the middle of the last sign MOTHER in the wh-question "WHAT" MOTHER? female native signer ------------wh-q (Stopped in middle of sign) DUCK, "WHAT" MOTHER?Baby Mallard Duck Ask Pig Where Mother Is
In the example below, the male late signer appeared to be laboriously producing the NMS. There was a strong v-shape configuration on his forehead. The sequence of three ASK's is a discourse marker and doesn't affect the spreading of NMS in the y/n quest ion. QUESTIONING is often used at the end of questions to express doubt regarding a positive answer to the question. This spreading as a whole over the example below wouldn't necessarily be considered characteristic NMS. male late signer ---------------------------------y/n-q ASK, ASK, ASK, SEE MOTHER? QUESTIONING The female late signer signed the example below with wh-q NMS over the whole wh-question. female late signer --------------wh-q WHERE'S MY MOTHER? In the example below, the male native signer used a couple of discourse markers, PIG THERE and ASK PIG before the wh-question WHERE'S MY MOTHER? and a "WHAT" afterwards. There was wh-q NMS spreading over this whole example. This kind of spreading would not be considered characteristic NMS, but rather, grammatical NMS over wh-questions with discourse markers involved. male native signer -----------------------------------------wh-q PIG THERE, ASK PIG, WHERE'S MY MOTHER? "WHAT" The female native signer used a discourse marker ASK-TO before the wh-question WHERE'S MY MOTHER? in the example below. The wh-q NMS spread over the discourse marker ASK-TO but stopped just short in the middle of the last sign MOTHER in the wh-question. female native signer -----------------wh-q (Stopped in middle of sign) ASK-TO WHERE'S MY MOTHER?Pig Dunno Where Mother Is
In the example below, the male late signer had a negation NMS for DUNNO. The NMS for the wh-question WHERE YOUR MOTHER? was present as well. There appeared to be a characteristic "puzzled" NMS while the sign WHERE was being signed in the sentence DUNNO WHERE. This WHERE is considered to be subordinate to DUNNO and not a sepa rate wh-q question WHERE? male late signer --------------wh-q ----n puzzled WHERE YOUR MOTHER? DUNNO WHERE, "WELL" In the example below, the female late signer did not have any negation NMS for DUNNO or for the sign NOT. It is not clear what ONE was supposed to mean. female late signer I DUNNO WHERE MOTHER I-S, ONE WHY NOT YOU GO SEE The male native signer did not shake his head for the negation in DUNNO, but did use a negative mouth configuration. His lips were turned downward. Since there was no wh-q NMS, the "WELL" was not interpreted as a "WHAT". male native signer ------n (no neg. headshake, only a neg. mouth configuration) I DUNNO, "WELL" The female native signer had a negation NMS for DUNNO. There was an unique NMS that first appeared to be a spreading of the negation NMS beyond the DUNNO sign, but was later analyzed to be a special "hold-it" NMS associated with the manual combination si gn HOLD-IT+I. The dominant hand was signing HOLD-IT and the non-dominant hand was signing I (or PRO-1). female native signer puzzled ------n --hold-it "WELL" I DUNNO HOLD-IT+IAdditional Data by Male Late Signer
The male late signer did not have any NMS for the y/n question SEE THERE COW? in the example below. male late signer COW, SEE THERE COW? When the male late signer signed this example below, the NMS looks like a wh-q NMS, but the question PRO KNOW EVERYTHING? would be considered a y/n question. This NMS also spread over the discourse marker ASK as well. This NMS spreading satisfies the cr iteria (optionally over a discourse marker, for example) for the production of grammatical NMS, and so is not considered to be characteristic NMS. male late signer --------------------wh-q ASK PRO KNOW EVERYTHING? The NMS in this example below produced by the male late signer looks like a characteristic NMS of "puzzled" and not really a wh-q NMS. If this example was considered to be a question, then it would be a y/n question COW?, not a wh-question. But since th is male late signer tends to use wh-q NMS for y/n questions, it's hard to be sure. Male late signer puzzled COWBaby Mallard Duck Finds Cow That Knows Everything
The male late signer in the example below produced a y/n-q NMS spreading over the discourse marker YOU COW and the y/n question YOU KNOW EVERY THING? but stopped short in the middle of the sign QUESTIONING that usually occurs at the end of questions. Wit hout any wh-q NMS, the "WHAT" would be treated as a "WELL". male late signer -------------------------------y/n-q (stopped in middle of sign) "WHAT", YOU COW, YOU KNOW EVERY THING? QUESTIONING The female late signer also produced a wh-q NMS for what would be considered to be a y/n question YOU COW KNOW EVERY THING YOU? female late signer -------------------------wh-q YOU COW KNOW EVERY THING YOU? The male native signer produced a y/n-q NMS that stopped in the middle of the last sign THING in the y/n question YOU THAT COW KNOW EVERY THING? male native signer ---------------------y/n-q (stopped in middle of sign) YOU THAT COW KNOW EVERY THING? The female native signer produced a y/n-q NMS in the example below that did not have a clear raising of the eyebrows, but the eyes were widened as if the eyebrows were indeed raised for the y/n question. The y/n-q NMS also spread over the QUESTIONING sig n that normally occurs at the end of questions. female native signer ---------------------------------------------y/n-q (widened eyes) YOU THAT YOU COW YOU KNOW EVERY^THING? QUESTIONINGMore Data by Late Male Signer
The male late signer was interpreted as using a characteristic NMS of "puzzled" when producing the manual sign LOOK in the example below. This example could be interpreted as a wh-question asking where to look. The characteristic "puzzled" NMS could be c onsidered to be a wh-q NMS if it spread only over one stand alone sign. male late signer puzzled LOOKCow Asks How To Help Baby Mallard Duck
The late male signer did the opposite of what he usually does in the example below. A y/n-q NMS was produced for a wh-question HELP HOW HELP? male late signer ---------y/n-q HELP HOW HELP? The female late signer produced a wh-q NMS spreading over the wh-question HOW HELP YOU in the example below. female late signer ---------wh-q HOW HELP YOU? The male native signer only had a headshake over a "WHAT" which could be a "WELL" since there is no wh-q NMS associated with it in the example below. There was no wh-q NMS produced by the male native signer for the wh-question HOW I HELP YOU? male native signer ---hs (headshake only, no other NMS) "WHAT", HOW I HELP YOU? The female native signer had a couple of "WELL" signs that were not interpreted as "WHAT" signs because there were no wh-q NMS associated with them in the example below. She produced wh-q NMS spreading over the whole wh-question HOW I HELP? female native signer ------wh-q "WELL", "WELL", HOW I HELP?Baby Mallard Duck Can't Find Mother
The male late signer did not produce any negation NMS for the sign CAN'T in the example below for CAN'T MOTHER or for MY MOTHER CAN'T FIND. The phrase CAN'T MOTHER appears to have a gapped verb. The sentential clause MY MOTHER CAN'T FIND appears to be a topicalized sentence without any topic NMS marking the topic MY MOTHER and with a gapped subject for CAN'T FINE. male late signer CAN'T MOTHER, MY MOTHER CAN'T FIND The female late signer did not produce any negation NMS for the sign CAN'T in the example below. female late signer I CAN'T FIND MOTHER The male native signer did not have any negation NMS for the sign CAN'T in the example below. There was what looked like a characteristic wh-q NMS produced over a long segment that included a discourse marker, a wh-question, three "WHAT" signs and some other discourse that was omitted. This characteristic wh-q NMS could be a "puzzled" NMS, except that there is at least one wh-question WHERE'S MY MOTHER WHERE? over which this NMS is spreading. In this case, the "puzzled" NMS and the characteristic wh-q NMS are practically the same thin g. The boundaries where the NMS below begin and end are more fuzzy, unlike typical grammatical wh-q NMS. The wh-q NMS below is not clearly marking the beginning and the ending of the wh-question. But the wh-question itself is not missing a wh-q NMS. male native signer --------------------------------------------------------------------wh-q BABY DUCK, "WHAT", WHERE'S MY MOTHER WHERE? "WHAT", CAN'T FIND..."WHAT" There wasn't any related data with the sign CAN'T for the female native signer in the pseudo example below. female native signer (No data, see next section)Asks Cow For Help Finding Mother
The male late signer produced a y/n-q NMS spreading over the y/n question KNOW WHERE MOTHER WHERE? in the example below. The reply to this y/n-question could have been a negative as indicated by the negative headshake produced alone without any manual si gns. The "WHAT" could be interpreted as a "WELL" since there is no wh-q NMS associated with this sign. male late signer -------------------y/n-q KNOW WHERE MOTHER WHERE? NEG-HEADSHAKE "WHAT" The female late signer produced what looked like a wh-q NMS for a y/n question in the example below. This tendency for wh-q NMS to appear in y/n questions is evident in both late signers. female late signer ----------wh-q SEE MY MOTHER? The male native signer produced preservating y/n-q NMS over two y/n questions FIND MY MOTHER? and KNOW WHERE MY MOTHER? in the example below. The "WHAT" could be interpreted as a "WELL" since there was no wh-q NMS associated with this sign in the exampl e below. male native signer --------------------------------y/n-q FIND MY MOTHER? KNOW WHERE MY MOTHER? "WHAT" In this example below that the female native signer produced, the only indication that the sentence is supposed to be interpreted as a question is the wh-q NMS spreading over the whole sentence plus the two "WHAT" signs that act as a sentence sandwich. Without the wh-q NMS, these two "WHAT" signs would have been interpreted as "WELL" signs. There is no wh-question manual sign within the sentence I SEARCH-FOR MY MOTHER. This example could have been interpreted alternatively as having characteristic "puzzled" NMS and that no real question is being posed. female native signer ----------------------------------wh-q "WHAT", I SEARCH-FOR MY MOTHER, "WHAT"More Data by Male Native Signer
The male native signer produced a spreading negative NMS over the whole example below for DUNNO. The "WHAT" should be interpreted as a "WELL" since there was no wh-q NMS associated with it. male native signer -----------neg "WHAT" I DUNNOMore Data by Male Late Signer
The male late signer produced a stand alone negative headshake in the example below. It is unclear what this headshake is for. male late signer NEG-HEADSHAKEBaby Mallard Duck Asks Hen If She Is Her Mother
The male late signer produced a y/n-q NMS for the y/n question MOTHER MINE MOTHER MINE? but stops short in the middle of the QUESTIONING sign. This QUESTIONING sign is usually found at the end of questions to express doubt in the forthcoming answer. male late signer ======================================= --------------------------y/n-q (stops in middle of sign) MOTHER MINE MOTHER MINE? QUESTIONING ======================================= The female late signer in the example below used a Signing Exact English sign ARE with the index and middle fingers crossed. Her eyebrows dropped after signing this ARE sign. However her y/n-q NMS head thrust was still there for the rest of the y/n ques tion ARE MY MOTHER? female late signer ======================================= ----------y/n-q ----------(eyebrows drop, head still thrust forward) ARE(S-E-E SIGN) MY MOTHER? ======================================= The male native signer produced a y/n-q NMS spreading over the discourse marker ASK, the y/n question YOU MY MOTHER? and the QUESTIONING sign usually found at the end of questions. male native signer ======================================= -------------------------y/n-q ASK YOU MY MOTHER? QUESTIONING ======================================= In the example below, the female native signer produced a wh-q NMS over a wh-question WHERE'S MY MOTHER? as well as the HUM/WAIT before this question. This preliminary NMS spreading over the HUM/WAIT looks like anticipation. This wh-q NMS would not be c onsidered a characteristic "puzzled" NMS because it didn't preservate over the OIC sign after the wh-question. The discourse marker ASK-TO had a wh-q NMS, but changed to a y/n-q NMS for the y/n question following this discourse marker. female native signer ======================================= ------------------------wh-q HUM/WAIT, WHERE'S MY MOTHER? OIC, --wh-q ---------y/n-q ASK-TO YOU MY MOTHER? =======================================Hen Replies Negatively
In the example below, the male late signer had a characteristic NMS frown throughout the whole example and beyond. The only place where there was a negative headshake was above the NO! lexicalized fingerspelling sign. The rest of the negative manual sig ns CAN'T and NOT, which occurred three times, did not have the negative NMS. Also, the y/n NMS was completely missing from the y/n sentence CAN'T SEE THAT? This y/n could have been obscured by the characteristic frown NMS or appeared looking like a wh-question but would be indistinguishable from the characteristic frown NMS. male late signer =========================================================== --n ---------------------------------------------------- LOOK-AT, NO! OF-COURSE NOT MINE YOU, NOT YOUR MOTHER, ------------------------------frown--------------------------- CAN'T SEE THAT? BELONG HERE NOT YOU... =========================================================== The female late signer had no negation NMS for the fingerspelled N-O and for the phrase NOT MOTHER, but did have a negation NMS for the phrase NOT BELONG HERE produced later in the dialogue. There was no negation or y/n-q NMS in the negative y/n question CAN'T SEE I CAN'T CL:-FLY? female late signer =========================================================== N-O, NOT MOTHER, CAN'T NOT, CAN'T SEE I CAN'T CL:-FLY?... --n NOT BELONG HERE =========================================================== The male native signer did not have any negation NMS in the example below for the question CAN'T SEE I NOT CL:-FLY? or for the phrase CAN'T CL:-FLY or for the sentence DUCK NOT BELONG HERE. The question CAN'T SEE I NOT CL:-FLY? was originally interpreted as an wh-question with wh-q NMS, but may actually be a y/n question with characteristic frown NMS for expressing incredulity. The next sentence is clearly a y/n question, I FLY? male native signer =========================================================== --------------------wh-q -y/n-q CAN'T SEE I NOT CL:-FLY?, I FLY?, CAN'T CL:-FLY,... DUCK NOT BELONG HERE =========================================================== The female native signer did not have any negation NMS for the phrase NOT I, but did have a sentential spreading negation for the sentence YOU NOT BELONG HERE. female native signer =========================================================== ------------------n NOT I, YOU NOT BELONG HERE ===========================================================Baby Mallard Duck Calls Out For Mother
In the example below, the male late signer used NMS for y/n questions that looked more like wh-q. Since signing MOTHER? alone without any wh-question manual signs would be considered a y/n question, then MOTHER? MOTHER? should be interpreted as an y/n qu estion. However, it is difficult to determine what kind of question the male late signer had intended to use, namely a y/n question or a wh-question. In the first sequence of MOTHER? MOTHER?, the NMS looked more like a y/n-q than in the second sequence of MOTHER? MOTHER? There is some preliminary spreading of the NMS over the verbs YELL, which suggest that the characteristic frown NMS is involved as well. This may account for the confusion in determining which NMS is being used for the MOTHER? MOTHER? y/n question sequences. The wh-q NMS is clearly present for the wh-question WHERE YOU? male late signer ================================================== -----------------------y/n-q ------wh-q YELL, YELL, MOTHER?, MOTHER?, WHERE YOU? -----------------------wh-q YELL, YELL, MOTHER? MOTHER? ================================================== In the example below, the female late signer did not have any wh-q NMS for the wh-questions WHERE MOTHER? and WHERE ARE YOU? The Signing Exact English sign ARE with the index and middle fingers crossed is being used in this example. female late signer ================================================== WHERE MOTHER? MOTHER, WHERE ARE (S-E-E SIGN) YOU? ================================================== The male native signer had clear wh-q NMS for the sequence of wh-questions WHERE'S MOTHER? WHERE'S MOTHER? and for the wh-question WHERE YOU? male native signer ================================================== -----------wh-q -----------wh-q ------wh-q WHERE'S MOTHER? WHERE'S MOTHER? WHERE YOU? "WHAT" ================================================== The female native signer had wh-q NMS for the wh-question WHERE'S MY MOTHER? There is some preliminary characteristic frown NMS over the verb sequence YELL, YELL. This characteristic frown NMS appears to have merged with the wh-q NMS marking the wh-ques tion. This sequence is produced with two hands alternating the production of the sign YELL on each hand. female native signer ================================================== ----------------------------------------------wh-q YELL(2H-ALT) YELL(2H-ALT) DUCK, WHERE'S MY MOTHER? ==================================================More Data by Male Native Signer
The male native signer produced a y/n-q NMS for the sign YOU? in the example below. male native signer y/n-q YOU?Findings
Spreading of NMS over grammatical constructions was consistent for all four subjects, however, the deaf native signers were more consistent in their production of NMS than the deaf late signers. The quality and quantity of NMS production differed between the deaf native signers and the deaf late signers. For example, the production of negation NMS was missing from sentences produced by all four of the subjects, but more so from the deaf late signers. The quality of NMS production for questions differed between the deaf native signers and the deaf late signers as well. For example, the late signers had y/n-q NMS that looked like wh-q NMS and vice versa. Other notable differences were found as well. The quantity of production of NMS by female late sig ner was somewhat non-existent. For example, the female late signer produced less NMS than expected. The quality of production of NMS by male late signer was somewhat exaggerated. All four subjects stopped short the production of grammatical NMS in the middle of the last sign in at least one example within the data, so this phenomenon is not significant, in my opinion.Conclusion
Non-manual grammatical signals could indeed be produced differently by a late learner with a hearing loss. For questions, there are form differences within NMS produced by late signers with a hearing loss. For example, wh-q NMS were substituted for y/n- q NMS and vice versa. Whether the questions themselves were meant by the deaf late signers to be y/n questions or wh-questions based on the substituted NMS is unclear. There does not seem to be any new alternative forms of NMS produced by late signers w ith hearing loss, only substitution of existing forms of NMS. Another significant difference in non-manual grammatical signals between native deaf ASL users and late users with hearing loss is that late users with hearing loss skip the production of negation NMS more than deaf ASL users. That deaf late signers have more missing negation NMS than deaf native signers provides evidence supporting the hypothesis that deaf late signers produce NMS differently than deaf native signers. Deaf late signers skip the production of some NMS, just l ike hearing signers do in contact sign. One might conclude that contact sign is the same thing as signing characteristic of late acquisition of ASL. If this is the case, then native ASL deaf people may be changing their style of communication to accommo date the late signer, no matter if the late signer is deaf or hearing. This brings up the question of whether this situation is an loose fitting example of "foreigner talk". However, before going any further on this train of thought, I must point out again that this research study also found a qualitative difference in the production of question NMS between deaf late signers and deaf native signers. This difference, in other words, is that wh-q NMS are often produced for y/n questions, and y/n-q NMS are produced for wh-questions (but not as often). Nothing was said in Lucas and Valli's study about the quality of production of NMS, only the quantity. We can only assume that the quality of production of NMS in their contact sign study was unremarkable. This qualitative difference between deaf native signers and deaf late signers is indeed remarkable here. Considering the findings in this research study, it does appear tha t a young age of acquisition of sign language helps with the production of grammatical NMS, but the scope of this study is too restricted to make a definite conclusion. The issues already mentioned in this paper need to be addressed in a further study.
References Aarons, Debra. 1994. Aspects of the syntax of American Sign Language. unpublished dissertation. Boston University. Aarons, D.; Bahan, B.; Kegl, J.; & Neidle, C. 1992a. Clausal Structure and a Tier for Grammatical Marking in American Sign Language. Nordic Journal of Linguistics 15:2, 103-142. 1994b. Subjects and Agreement in American Sign Language. In Ahlgren, I., Bergman, B. & Brennan, M. Perspectives on Sign Language Structure: papers from the Fifth International Symposium on Sign Language Structure [Volume 1], Durham, England: The International Sign Linguistics Association. 13-28. Bahan, Benjamin J. 1996. Non-manual realization of agreement in American Sign Language. Unpublished dissertation. Boston University, Boston, MA. Baker-Shenk, Charlotte Lee. 1983a. A Microanalysis of the Nonmanual Components of Questions in American Sign Language. Unpublished Ph.D. Dissertation, University of California, Berkeley. & C. Padden. 1978b. Focusing on the Nonmanual Components of American Sign Language. In P. Siple (Ed.) Understanding Language Through Sign Language Research. New York City, NY: Academic Press. 27-57. Jackson, R. Tamar; Un, Peter; Orton, Rebecca. 1998. A Comparison of NMS Among Hearing, Hard of Hearing, and Deaf Signers. Unpublished LIN741 Sociolinguistics of American Deaf People team paper. Langacker, Ronald W. 1991. Cognitive Grammar. In Droste, Flip and Joseph, John E. (eds.). Linguistic Theory and Grammatical Description. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 275-306. Lenneberg, Eric H. 1967. Biological Foundations of Language. New York: Wiley Liddell, Scott. 1980. American Sign Language Syntax. The Hague, NY: Mouton. Lillo-Martin, D. 1986a. The Point of View Predicate in American Sign Language. In Emmorey, Karen & Judy Reilly (eds.). Language, Gesture, and Space. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Ehrlbaum Associates. 1990b. Parameters for Questions: Evidence from wh-Movement in ASL. In Lucas, C. (ed.) Sign Language Research, Theoretical Issues. Washington DC: Gallaudet University Press. 211-222. & Petronio, K. 1997c. WH-Movement and the Position of Spec CP: Evidence from American Sign Language. Lg. 73:18-57. Lucas, Ceil & Valli, Clayton. 1989a. Language Contact in the American Deaf Community. In Lucas, Ceil (ed.) The Sociolinguistics of the Deaf Community. San Diego, CA: Academic Press. 11-40. 1992b. Language Contact in the American Deaf Community. San Diego, CA: Academic Press. Mayberry, Rachel I. & Eichen, Ellen B. 1991. The Long-Lasting Advantage of Learning Sign Language in Childhood: Another Look at the Critical Period for Language Acquisition. In Journal of Memory and Language. Volume 30. San Diego CA: Academic Press. 486-512. Padden, C. 1986. Verbs and Role Shifting in American Sign Language. In Padden, C. (ed.). Proceedings of the Fourth National Symposium on Sign Language Teaching and Research. Silver Spring, MD: NAD. 44-57. Appendix A Mallard Duck Farm Story
Once upon a time on a farm somewhere out in the Midwest, a mallard duck popped out of her egg and found her mother no where nearby. She decided to go look for her mother. She paddled across the pond over to the pig-pen. Upon seeing the pig, the baby du ck asked, "Where is my mother?" The pig said, "I don't know where your mother is, why don't you ask the cow over yonder, she knows everything." So the baby mallard waddled across the field and came upon a cow and asked, "Are you the cow that knows everything?" The cow was mystified but appeared pleased and asked, "How can I help you?" The baby mallard replied sadly, "I can't find my mother, I went to the pig down the field, who send me to you. Have you seen my mother?" The cow replied that she noticed some birds, ducks and other flying animals over by the chicken coop and suggested that her mother may be there. The mallard duck flew awkwardly to the chicken coop and asked the first winged animal who happened to be the hen, "Are you my mother?" The hen flapped her wings and said, "No! Of course not, can't you see I cannot fly! Go fly back over the fence and find your mother on the other side. You don't belong here." The baby mallard cringed and flew over the fence. And shout out loud, "Mother, mother where are you?" Just as she finished, a mallard duck called out, "Come over here, I'm your mother." The baby mallard duck was so happy she finally found her mother that her mother vowed to remain by her baby's side from now on. Appendix B Gloss Sheets
Key: ? = grammatical question marker ??? = uncertainty about what was signed (?) = uncertainty about the gloss or sign (letter) = missing letter from fingerspelling (other) = other information Male Late Signer
ONCE TIME ON FARM THERE M-(I)-D WEST FEEL W-E-L-D-R-D (M-A-L-L-A-R-D), DUCK RECENT SPRING BORN EGG CL:-POP-OUT-WITH-2-HAND-SHAPE, LOOK-AROUND, MOTHER WHERE? DECIDE OK SEARCH-FOR PADDLE ON TO P-O-N-D WATER TO THERE SWIM TO THERE, PIG ASK, WATCH, HEY, HI EN TER LOOK-AROUND NOTICE PIG ASK, ASK, ASK, SEE MOTHER?, QUESTIONING, CL:-LOOK-AT, WHERE YOUR MOTHER? DUNNO WHERE, "WELL", WAIT, COW, SEE THERE COW? ASK PRO KNOW EVERYTHING? OK, GOOD CL:-1-MOVE AWKWARD WADDLE, CL:-MOVE-TO-POINT(?), COW LOOK-AT, "WHAT", YOU COW, YOU KNOW EVERY THING? QUESTIONING, MYSTIFIED, HELP HOW HELP? SAD CAN'T MOTHER, MY MOTHER CAN'T FIND, KNOW WHERE MOTHER WHERE?, NEG-HEADSHAKE, "WHAT", COW, HMM, TAP-TAP, KNOW-THAT NOTICE CHICKENS, DUCKS, ETC., RECENTLY FLY THERE, NOT-FAR, CHICKEN C-O- O-P (C-O-)O-P, TRY THERE, OK, GOOD, DUCK BABY DUCK AWKWARD FLY, FLY, CHICKEN C-O-O-P NEG-HEADSHAKE NOTICE FIRST CHICKEN GO, ???/SEE(?) ASK TAP/TOUCH YOU, MOTHER MINE MOTHER MINE? QUESTIONING, LOOK-AT, NO! OF-COURSE NOT MINE YOU, NOT YOUR MOTHER, CAN'T SEE THAT? BELONG HERE NOT YOU, SHOULD FLY OVER, NOTICE CHECK THERE MOTHER THERE, SORRY CL:-1-MOVE, YELL, YELL, MOTHER?, MOTHER?, WHERE YOU? YELL, YELL, MOTHER? MOTHER?, WAIT-A-MIN., HEAR OTHER DUCK REPLY COME-HERE, COME, COME-HERE YOU, I YOUR MOTHER, I YOUR MOTHER, COME, COME-HERE, TRILL, HAPPY, FINALLY MOTHER FIND HAPPY MEET, MOTHER DECIDE FROM-NOW-ON CONTINUE TOGETHER, "WHAT". ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------Female Late Signer
ONCE ON TIME, I, FARM SOMEWHERE OUT M-(I)-D-W-(E)-S-T, CL:-AREA, BABY DUCK BORN, CL:-HEAD-POP-OUT-OF-EGG, SEE, WONDER, REALIZE ITS MOTHER NOT AROUND, "WHAT", PRO-1/HAVE DECIDE TRY TO SEARCH-FOR MOTHER, FINE, AFTER SEE P-(O-N-D) THERE, PRO-1/HAVE SWAM AFTE R P-E-G, P-I-G P-E-N, ARRIVE, SEE PIG CL:-AREA, BABY DUCK ASK WHERE'S MY MOTHER? P-I-G, ???, I DUNNO WHERE MOTHER I-S, ONE WHY NOT YOU GO SEE ASK IT COW THERE CL:-AREA KNOW EVERYTHING, BABY DUCK WATCH, FIND, "WHAT", CL:-FLY/PADDLE(?) N-O, SORRY HAVE, CL:- PADDLE TO FIELD(?), SEE COW, ASK, YOU COW KNOW EVERY THING YOU?, COW LOOK, SEEM PLEASED, FINE, N-(O), HOW HELP YOU?, BABY DUCK SAD, I CAN'T FIND MOTHER, I GO PIG, PRO TOLD ME COME HERE POINT, ASK YOU, SEE MY MOTHER? COW REPLY I SAW ANIMALS, DUCKS, CHICKEN S, AND-SO-ON, OTHER CL:-FLY ANIMALS, THERE, CHICKEN C-O-O-P, POINT, SUGGEST, WELL/SHRUG, MOTHER THERE, "WHAT", DUCK, FINE, GO, I CL:-FLY-AWKWARDLY AWKWARD ARRIVE CHICKEN C-O-O-P, ASK FIRST CL:-FLY ANIMAL YOU HAPPEN SEE H-E-N, ASK, ARE(S-E-E SIGN) MY MOTHE R? PRO H-E-N, I SAY, N-O NOT MOTHER, CAN'T NOT, CAN'T SEE, I CAN'T CL:-FLY, GO-AWAY, GO CL:-FLY THERE ACROSS/OVER CL:-FENCE, FIND MOTHER THERE OTHER S-I-D-E, NOT BELONG HERE, GO-AWAY, BABY DUCK LOOK, FINE, CL:-FLY OVER/ACROSS CL:-FENCE, CALL-OUT-GESTURE, WHERE MOTHER, MOTHER WHERE ARE (S-E-E SIGN) YOU? HEARD GESTURE:-COME-HERE, I MOTHER, YOU MOTHER, DUCK S-O BABY DUCK S-O HAPPY, POINT FINALLY ARRIVE, SEE FIND MOTHER THERE, O, MOTHER TOUCH-HEART STAY WITH ITS S-I-L, CONTINUE --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Male Native Signer
DUCK FARM STORY ONCE TIME LONG-AGO, ONE DUCK IN(?) EGG CL:-HEAD-POP-OUT-OF-EGG, LOOK, WHERE'S MOTHER? NONE, LOOK, SEARCH-FOR, "WHAT"?, FIND, SEARCH-FOR FOR MOTHER, LOOK SAW P-(O)-N-D WATER CL:-CROOKED-L, SEE THERE PIG NEAR CL:-CROOKED-L, FINE, PADDLE SWIM PADDLE ARRIVE PIG THERE ASK PIG, WHERE'S MY MOTHER? "WHAT", PIG LOOK, I DUNNO, "WELL", I SUGGEST GO THERE, SEE COW THERE KNOW EVERY THING, DUCK SAW, FINE, "WHAT", IN, "WHAT", FARM CL:-AREA, WADDLE, ARRIVE, FOUND COW THERE, FINE, ASK, YOU THAT COW KNOW EV ERY THING? COW LOOK-AT, FINE, I KNOW EVERY THING, GOOD, "WHAT", HOW I HELP YOU?, BABY DUCK, "WHAT", WHERE'S MY MOTHER WHERE?, "WHAT", CAN'T FIND, I GO TAP PIG THERE TOLD ME GO SEE YOU "WHAT" FIND MY MOTHER? KNOW WHERE MY MOTHER?, "WHAT", THAT COW SAID "WH AT", I DUNNO WHERE MOTHER BUT INFORM SEE MANY OTHER ANIMALS CL:-FLY, DUCKS THAT, DUCKS, CHICKENS ON THERE, GO-THERE FIND MOTHER THERE, DUCK, OIC, FINE, CL:-FLY AWKWARD, CL:-FLY CL:-OVER-TO-C-O-O-P, CHICKEN BOX FIRST ANIMAL WINGED, ASK, YOU MY MOTHER? QUESTIONING, WINGED LOOK-AT, SICK THERE, CAN'T SEE I NOT CL:-FLY?, I FLY?, CAN'T CL:-FLY, GO CL:-FLY CL:-OVER-FENCE FENCE FIND MOTHER SOME WHERE CL:-AREA, ITSELF DUCK, ONE, DUCK NOT BELONG HERE, BABY DUCK (CRINGE) LOOK-AT FACIAL-EXPRES SION, HOLD-IT, PSHAW, CL:-GO-OVER-FENCE, LOOK-AT, SAW ASK OTHER DUCK THERE, WHERE'S MOTHER? WHERE'S MOTHER? WHERE YOU? "WHAT", DUCK THERE CALL COME HERE, I YOUR MOTHER, YOU, DUCK TRILLED SEE MOTHER THERE FINE, MOTHER PROMISE MOTHER CL:-STAY-SIDE-BY-SIDE F ROM-NOW-ON --------------------------------------------------------------------------------Female Native Signer
WHERE, WEST FARM CL:-AREA THERE HAVE EGG CL:-OVAL-SHAPE/EGG, THERE INSIDE CL:-BREAK-OPEN, CL:-FIST-POP-THRU-HAND/HEAD-POP-THRU-EGG-SHELL& INDEX-FINGER-POP-THRU/BEAK-POP-THRU, BABY DUCK THERE LOOK-AROUND ALL-BARE, DUCK, "WHAT" MOTHER?, DECIDED SEARCH FOR MO THER, CL:-1-MOVE/PERSON-MOVE, SEARCH-FOR, CL:-1-MOVE/PERSON-MOVE WATER CL:-CROOKED-L/THIS-SIZE SWIM, CL:-1-MOVE/PERSON-MOVE, MEET PIG CL:-AREA MEET THAT PIG ASK-TO WHERE'S MY MOTHER?, POINT-TO-CL:-1, PIG "WHAT" I DUNNO, HOLD-IT+I SUGGESTION ASK-TO COW THE RE, T-R-Y, YOU BABY YOU PIG TELL YOU PRO KNOW EVERY^THING, GO-AHEAD GO-THERE, BABY FINE CL:-WADDLE, CL:-PATH MEET COW, TAP, YOU THAT YOU COW YOU KNOW EVERY^THING? QUESTIONING, COW LOOK-AT, OIC, I, "WELL", "WELL", HOW I HELP?, PRO, FINE, "WHAT", I SEARCH-F OR MY MOTHER, "WHAT", PRO COW LOOK-AT, WELL, SUGGEST T-R-Y OVER-THERE CHICKEN C-O-O-P, THERE, SEE MANY CHICKENS, CL:-AREA CONGREGATE THERE, T-R-Y, GO-THERE, PRO BABY FINE, CL:-WADDLE, CL:-AWKWARDLY-FLY, REAL AWKWARD, FLY, AWKWARD THERE ARRIVE THERE CHICKE N C-O-O-P MEET FIRST, PRO-FINGER H-E-N PRO-FINGER ROOSTER, PRO-FINGER ASK-TO, HUM/WAIT, WHERE'S MY MOTHER?, OIC, ASK-TO, YOU MY MOTHER?, H-E-N, I YOUR MOTHER, GO-AWAY, NOT I, YOU NOT BELONG HERE, GO THERE TRY OVER-THERE CL:-FENCE THERE THAT, BABY DUCK STO P/HOLD-IT FINE CL:-1-MOVE/PERSON-MOVE THERE CL:-FENCE YELL(2H-ALT) YELL(2H-ALT) DUCK, WHERE'S MY MOTHER?, YELL(2H-ALT) YELL(2H-ALT), T-H-E-N, MOTHER HEAR MEET, I YOUR MOTHER, BABY DUCK LOOK-AT TRILL MEET MOTHER, STOP/HOLD-IT PROMISE I, I WILL STAY WITH Y OU ALWAYS FOR EVER