1932

Abstract

Natural sign languages of deaf communities are acquired on the same time scale as that of spoken languages if children have access to fluent signers providing input from birth. Infants are sensitive to linguistic information provided visually, and early milestones show many parallels. The modality may affect various areas of language acquisition; such effects include the form of signs (sign phonology), the potential advantage presented by visual iconicity, and the use of spatial locations to represent referents, locations, and movement events. Unfortunately, the vast majority of deaf children do not receive accessible linguistic input in infancy, and these children experience language deprivation. Negative effects on language are observed when first-language acquisition is delayed. For those who eventually begin to learn a sign language, earlier input is associated with better language and academic outcomes. Further research is especially needed with a broader diversity of participants.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1146/annurev-linguistics-043020-092357
2021-01-04
2024-06-12
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

/deliver/fulltext/linguistics/7/1/annurev-linguistics-043020-092357.html?itemId=/content/journals/10.1146/annurev-linguistics-043020-092357&mimeType=html&fmt=ahah

Literature Cited

  1. Anderson D, Reilly JS. 1997. The puzzle of negation: how children move from communicative to grammatical negation in ASL. Appl. Psycholinguist. 18:4411–29
    [Google Scholar]
  2. Anderson D, Reilly JS. 2002. The MacArthur Communicative Development Inventory: normative data for American Sign Language. J. Deaf Stud. Deaf Educ. 7:283–106
    [Google Scholar]
  3. Anglin-Jaffe H. 2013. Signs of resistance: peer learning of sign languages within ‘oral’ schools for the deaf. Stud. Philos. Educ. 32:3261–71
    [Google Scholar]
  4. Bahan B, Bauman HD, Montenegro F 2008. Audism Unveiled DVD, DawnSign Press San Diego, CA:
    [Google Scholar]
  5. Baker A, Woll B 2008. Sign Language Acquisition Amsterdam/Philadelphia, PA: John Benjamins
    [Google Scholar]
  6. Baker SA, Golinkoff RM, Petitto LA 2006. New insights into old puzzles from infants’ categorical discrimination of soundless phonetic units. Lang. Learn. Dev. 2:3147–62
    [Google Scholar]
  7. Berk S. 2003. Sensitive period effects on the acquisition of language: a study of language development PhD Diss., Univ. Conn Storrs:
    [Google Scholar]
  8. Berk S, Lillo-Martin D. 2012. The two-word stage: motivated by linguistic or cognitive constraints. Cogn. Psychol. 65:1118–40
    [Google Scholar]
  9. Boudreault P, Mayberry RI. 2006. Grammatical processing in American Sign Language: age of first-language acquisition effects in relation to syntactic structure. Lang. Cogn. Process. 21:5608–35
    [Google Scholar]
  10. Brentari D, Goldin-Meadow S. 2017. Language emergence. Annu. Rev. Linguist. 3:363–88
    [Google Scholar]
  11. Brooks R, Singleton JL, Meltzoff AN 2020. Enhanced gaze-following behavior in Deaf infants of Deaf parents. Dev. Sci. 23:2e12900
    [Google Scholar]
  12. Brown R. 1973. A First Language: The Early Stages Cambridge, MA: Harvard Univ. Press
    [Google Scholar]
  13. Carrigan EM, Coppola M. 2017. Successful communication does not drive language development: evidence from adult homesign. Cognition 158:10–27
    [Google Scholar]
  14. Caselli NK, Lieberman AM, Pyers JE 2020. The ASL-CDI 2.0: an updated, normed adaptation of the MacArthur Bates Communicative Development Inventory for American Sign Language. Behav. Res. Methods. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13428-020-01376-6
    [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  15. Caselli NK, Pyers JE. 2017. The road to language learning is not entirely iconic: iconicity, neighborhood density, and frequency facilitate acquisition of sign language. Psychol. Sci. 28:7979–87
    [Google Scholar]
  16. Caselli NK, Pyers JE. 2020. Degree and not type of iconicity affects sign language vocabulary acquisition. J. Exp. Psychol. Learn. Mem. Cogn. 46:1127–39
    [Google Scholar]
  17. Chen Pichler D. 2001. Word order variation and acquisition in American Sign Language PhD Diss., Univ. Conn Storrs:
    [Google Scholar]
  18. Chen Pichler D. 2008. Views on word order in early ASL: then and now. Signs of the Time: Selected Papers from TISLR 8293–315 Seedorf, Ger: Signum
    [Google Scholar]
  19. Chen Pichler D. 2012. Acquisition. Sign Language: An International Handbook R Pfau, M Steinbach, B Woll 647–86 Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton
    [Google Scholar]
  20. Chen Pichler D. 2016. Baby signs. The SAGE Deaf Studies Encyclopedia G Gertz, P Boudreault 72–73 Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE
    [Google Scholar]
  21. Chen Pichler D. 2017. Constructing a profile of successful L2 signer hearing parents of deaf children Work. Pap., Gallaudet Univ Washington, DC:
    [Google Scholar]
  22. Chen Pichler D, Koulidobrova E 2016. Acquisition of sign language as a second language. The Oxford Handbook of Deaf Studies in Language M Marschark, PE Spencer 218–30 Oxford, UK: Oxford Univ. Press
    [Google Scholar]
  23. Chen Pichler D, Koulidobrova E, Palmer JL 2019. Modality-(in)dependent second language learning. Senri Ethnol. Stud. 101:165–86
    [Google Scholar]
  24. Chen Pichler D, Kuntze M, Lillo-Martin D, Quadros RM, Stumpf MR 2017a. Sign Language Acquisition by Deaf and Hearing Children: A Bilingual Introductory Digital Course Washington, DC: Gallaudet Univ. Press
    [Google Scholar]
  25. Chen Pichler D, Lillo-Martin D, Palmer JL 2018. A short introduction to heritage signers. Sign Lang. Stud. 18:3309–27
    [Google Scholar]
  26. Chen Pichler D, Reynolds W, Palmer JL, Quadros RM, Kozak LV, Lillo-Martin D 2017b. Heritage signers: bimodal bilingual children from deaf families. Language Acquisition at the Interfaces: Proceedings of GALA 2015247–69 Newcastle upon Tyne: Cambridge Scholars
    [Google Scholar]
  27. Cheng Q, Mayberry RI. 2019. Acquiring a first language in adolescence: the case of basic word order in American Sign Language. J. Child Lang. 46:2214–40
    [Google Scholar]
  28. Coerts J. 2000. Early sign combinations in the acquisition of Sign Language of the Netherlands: evidence for language-specific features. Language Acquisition by Eye C Chamberlain, JP Morford, RI Mayberry 91–109 Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum
    [Google Scholar]
  29. Coppola M, Newport EL. 2005. Grammatical subjects in home sign: abstract linguistic structure in adult primary gesture systems without linguistic input. PNAS 102:5219249–53
    [Google Scholar]
  30. Cormier K, Schembri A, Vinson D, Orfanidou E 2012. First language acquisition differs from second language acquisition in prelingually deaf signers: evidence from sensitivity to grammaticality judgement in British Sign Language. Cognition 124:150–65
    [Google Scholar]
  31. Crain S. 2017. Acquisition of quantifiers. Annu. Rev. Linguist. 3:219–43
    [Google Scholar]
  32. Davidson K, Lillo-Martin D, Chen Pichler D 2014. Spoken English language development among native signing children with cochlear implants. J. Deaf Stud. Deaf Educ. 19:2238–50
    [Google Scholar]
  33. de Beuzeville L. 2006. Visual and linguistic representation in the acquisition of depicting verbs: a study of native signing deaf children of Auslan (Australian Sign Language) PhD Diss., Univ. Sydney Sydney, Aust:.
    [Google Scholar]
  34. De Meulder M, Kusters A, Moriarty E, Murray JJ 2019. Describe, don't prescribe: the practice and politics of translanguaging in the context of deaf signers. J. Multiling. Multicult. Dev. 40:10892–906
    [Google Scholar]
  35. de Villiers JG. 2017. Unbiased language assessment: contributions of linguistic theory. Annu. Rev. Linguist. 3:309–30
    [Google Scholar]
  36. de Vos C. 2012. The Kata Kolok perfective in child signing: coordination of manual and non-manual components. Sign Languages in Village Communities: Anthropological and Linguistic Insights U Zeshan, C de Vos 127–52 Boston, MA: De Gruyter Mouton
    [Google Scholar]
  37. de Vos C, Pfau R 2015. Sign language typology: the contribution of rural sign languages. Annu. Rev. Linguist. 1:265–88
    [Google Scholar]
  38. Dudis P. 2004. Depiction of events in ASL: conceptual integration of temporal components PhD Diss., Univ. Calif Berkeley:
    [Google Scholar]
  39. Emmorey K, Bellugi U, Friederici A, Horn P 1995. Effects of age of acquisition on grammatical sensitivity: evidence from on-line and off-line tasks. Appl. Psycholinguist. 16:11–23
    [Google Scholar]
  40. Emmorey K, Borinstein HB, Thompson R, Gollan TH 2008. Bimodal bilingualism. Biling. Lang. Cogn. 11:143–61
    [Google Scholar]
  41. Fenlon J, Schembri A, Cormier K 2018. Modification of indicating verbs in British Sign Language: a corpus-based study. Language 94:184–118
    [Google Scholar]
  42. Ferjan Ramírez N, Lieberman AM, Mayberry RI 2013. The initial stages of first-language acquisition begun in adolescence: when late looks early. J. Child Lang. 40:2391–414
    [Google Scholar]
  43. Fischer SD. 2017. Crosslinguistic variation in sign language syntax. Annu. Rev. Linguist. 3:125–47
    [Google Scholar]
  44. Gagne DL, Coppola M. 2017. Visible social interactions do not support the development of false belief understanding in the absence of linguistic input: evidence from deaf adult homesigners. Front. Psychol. 8:837
    [Google Scholar]
  45. Gannon J. 2011. Deaf Heritage: A Narrative History of Deaf America Washington, DC: Gallaudet Univ. Press
    [Google Scholar]
  46. Geer LC, Keane J. 2017. Improving ASL fingerspelling comprehension in L2 learners with explicit phonetic instruction. Lang. Teach. Res. 22:439–57
    [Google Scholar]
  47. Gleitman LR, Liberman MY, McLemore CA, Partee BH 2019. The impossibility of language acquisition (and how they do it). Annu. Rev. Linguist. 5:1–24
    [Google Scholar]
  48. Goldin-Meadow S. 2003. The Resilience of Language New York: Psychol. Press
    [Google Scholar]
  49. Gómez DM, Berent I, Benavides-Varela S, Bion RAH, Cattarossi L et al. 2014. Language universals at birth. PNAS 111:165837–41
    [Google Scholar]
  50. Goodwin C, Lillo-Martin D. 2019. Morphological accuracy in the speech of bimodal bilingual children with CIs. J. Deaf Stud. Deaf Educ. 24:4435–47
    [Google Scholar]
  51. Hall ML, Eigsti IM, Bortfeld H, Lillo-Martin D 2017. Auditory deprivation does not impair executive function, but language deprivation might: evidence from a parent-report measure in Deaf native signing children. J. Deaf Stud. Deaf Educ. 22:19–21
    [Google Scholar]
  52. Hall ML, Hall WC, Caselli NK 2019. Deaf children need language, not (just) speech. First Lang 39:4367–95
    [Google Scholar]
  53. Hall WC. 2017. What you don't know can hurt you: the risk of language deprivation by impairing sign language development in deaf children. Matern. Child Health J. 21:5961–65
    [Google Scholar]
  54. Hall WC, Levin LL, Anderson ML 2017. Language deprivation syndrome: a possible neurodevelopmental disorder with sociocultural origins. Soc. Psychiatry Psychiatr. Epidemiol. 52:6761–76
    [Google Scholar]
  55. Hamilton B, Clark MDM. 2020. The Deaf Mentor Program: benefits to families. Psychology 11:713–36
    [Google Scholar]
  56. Henner J, Caldwell-Harris CL, Novogrodsky R, Hoffmeister R 2016. American Sign Language syntax and analogical reasoning skills are influenced by early acquisition and age of entry to signing schools for the deaf. Front. Psychol. 7:1982
    [Google Scholar]
  57. Henner J, Hoffmeister RJ, Reis J 2017. Developing sign language measurements for research with deaf populations. Research in Deaf Education SW Cawthon, CL Gaberoglio 141–61 Oxford, UK: Oxford Univ. Press
    [Google Scholar]
  58. Henner J, Novogrodsky R, Caldwell-Harris C, Hoffmeister R 2019. The development of American Sign Language-based analogical reasoning in signing deaf children. J. Speech Lang. Hear. Res. 62:193–105
    [Google Scholar]
  59. Henner J, Novogrodsky R, Reis J, Hoffmeister R 2018. Recent issues in the use of signed language assessments for diagnosis of language disorders in signing deaf and hard of hearing children. J. Deaf Stud. Deaf Educ. 23:4307–16
    [Google Scholar]
  60. Hill JC. 2017. The importance of the sociohistorical context in sociolinguistics: the case of Black ASL. Sign Lang. Stud. 18:141–57
    [Google Scholar]
  61. Hoffmeister RJ. 2008. Border crossings by hearing children of deaf parents. Open Your Eyes: Deaf Studies Talking HDL Bauman 189–215 Minneapolis, MN: Univ. Minn. Press
    [Google Scholar]
  62. Hou LYS. 2013. Acquiring plurality in directional verbs. Sign Lang. Linguist. 16:131–73
    [Google Scholar]
  63. Hou LYS, Kusters A. 2020. Linguistic ethnography of signed languages. The Routledge Handbook of Linguistic Ethnography K Tusting 340–55 New York: Routledge
    [Google Scholar]
  64. Hrastinski I, Wilbur RB. 2016. Academic achievement of deaf and hard-of-hearing students in an ASL/English bilingual program. J. Deaf Stud. Deaf. Educ. 21:2156–70
    [Google Scholar]
  65. Humphries T, Kushalnagar P, Mathur G, Napoli DJ, Padden C et al. 2016. Language choices for deaf infants: advice for parents regarding sign languages. Clin. Pediatr. 55:6513–17
    [Google Scholar]
  66. Johnston TA. 2003. Language standardization and signed language dictionaries. Sign Lang. Stud. 3:4431–68
    [Google Scholar]
  67. Kanto L, Laakso ML, Huttunen K 2017. Use of code-mixing by young hearing children of Deaf parents. Bilingualism 20:5947–64
    [Google Scholar]
  68. Koulidobrova E. 2017. Language interaction effects in bimodal bilingualism: argument omission in the languages of hearing ASL-English bilinguals. Linguist. Approaches Biling. 7:5583–613
    [Google Scholar]
  69. Kusters A, Spotti M, Swanwick R, Tapio E 2017. Beyond languages, beyond modalities: transforming the study of semiotic repertoires. Int. J. Multiling. 14:3219–32
    [Google Scholar]
  70. Kwok L, Berk S, Lillo-Martin D 2020. Person versus locative agreement: evidence from late learners and language emergence. Sign Lang. Linguist. 23:1737
    [Google Scholar]
  71. Langdon C. 2013. The linguistic structure and neural representation of classifier constructions: through the lens of child acquisition and fNIRS neuroimaging of adults PhD Diss., Gallaudet Univ. Washington, DC:
    [Google Scholar]
  72. Lemos Pizzio A. 2006. Variability in word order in the acquisition of Brazilian Sign Language: constructions with topic and focus MA Thesis, Fed. Univ. Santa Catarina, Santa Catarina Braz:.
    [Google Scholar]
  73. Liddell SK. 2003. Grammar, Gesture, and Meaning in American Sign Language Cambridge, UK: Cambridge Univ. Press
    [Google Scholar]
  74. Lidz J, Gagliardi A. 2015. How nature meets nurture: Universal Grammar and statistical learning. Annu. Rev. Linguist. 1:333–53
    [Google Scholar]
  75. Lieberman AM, Mayberry RI. 2015. Studying sign language acquisition. Research Methods in Sign Language Studies: A Practical Guide E Orfanidou, B Woll, G Morgan 281–99 Malden, MA: Wiley Blackwell
    [Google Scholar]
  76. Lillo-Martin D. 2016. Sign language acquisition studies. The Cambridge Handbook of Child Language E Bavin, LR Naigles 504–26 Cambridge, UK: Cambridge Univ. Press, 2nd ed..
    [Google Scholar]
  77. Lillo-Martin D, Chen Pichler D 2018. Development of pointing signs in ASL and implications for their analysis Poster presented at 43rd Annual Boston University Conference on Language Development Boston, MA: Nov 2–4
    [Google Scholar]
  78. Lillo-Martin D, Goodwin C, Prunier L 2017. ASL-IPSyn: a new measure of grammatical development Poster presented at 42nd Annual Boston University Conference on Language Development Boston, MA: Nov 3–5
    [Google Scholar]
  79. Lillo-Martin D, Quadros RM, Chen Pichler D 2016. The development of bimodal bilingualism: implications for linguistic theory. Linguist. Approaches Biling. 6:6719–55
    [Google Scholar]
  80. Lillo-Martin D, Quadros RM, Chen Pichler D, Fieldsteel Z 2014. Language choice in bimodal bilingual development. Front. Psychol. 5:1163
    [Google Scholar]
  81. Linton A. 2004. A critical mass model of bilingualism among U.S.-born Hispanics. Soc. Forces 83:1279–314
    [Google Scholar]
  82. Malaia EA, Krebs J, Roehm D, Wilbur RB 2020. Age of acquisition effects differ across linguistic domains in sign language: EEG evidence. Brain Lang 200:104708
    [Google Scholar]
  83. Mauldin L. 2019. Don't look at it as a miracle cure: contested notions of success and failure in family narratives of pediatric cochlear implantation. Soc. Sci. Med. 228:117–25
    [Google Scholar]
  84. Maurer D, Werker JF. 2014. Perceptual narrowing during infancy: a comparison of language and faces. Dev. Psychobiol. 56:2154–78
    [Google Scholar]
  85. Mayberry RI, Davenport T, Roth A, Halgren E 2018. Neurolinguistic processing when the brain matures without language. Cortex 99:390–403
    [Google Scholar]
  86. Mayberry RI, Kluender R. 2018. Rethinking the critical period for language: new insights into an old question from American Sign Language. Bilingualism 21:5886–905
    [Google Scholar]
  87. McCaskill C, Lucas C, Bayley R, Hill JC 2011. The Hidden Treasure of Black ASL Washington, DC: Gallaudet Univ. Press
    [Google Scholar]
  88. McDermid C. 2014. Evidence of a “hearing” dialect of ASL while interpreting. J. Interpret. 23:12
    [Google Scholar]
  89. Meier RP. 1982. Icons, analogues, and morphemes: the acquisition of verb agreement in American Sign Language PhD Diss., Univ. Calif San Diego:
    [Google Scholar]
  90. Meier RP. 1987. Elicited imitation of verb agreement in ASL: iconically or morphologically determined. J. Mem. Lang. 36:362–76
    [Google Scholar]
  91. Meier RP. 2016. Sign language acquisition. Oxford Handbooks Online https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199935345.013.19
    [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  92. Meier RP, Newport EL. 1990. Out of the hands of babes: on a possible sign advantage in language acquisition. Language 66:11–23
    [Google Scholar]
  93. Mitchell RE, Karchmer MA. 2004. Chasing the mythical ten percent: parental hearing status of deaf and hard of hearing students in the United States. Sign Lang. Stud. 4:2138–63
    [Google Scholar]
  94. Morford JP. 2003. Grammatical development in adolescent first-language learners. Linguistics 41:4681–721
    [Google Scholar]
  95. Morgan G. 2014. On language acquisition in speech and sign: development of combinatorial structure in both modalities. Front. Psychol. 5:1217
    [Google Scholar]
  96. Morgan G, Barrière I, Woll B 2006. The influence of typology and modality in the acquisition of verb agreement in British Sign Language. First Lang 26:19–44
    [Google Scholar]
  97. Morgan G, Herman R, Barrière I, Woll B 2008. The onset and mastery of spatial language in children acquiring British Sign Language. Cogn. Dev. 23:11–19
    [Google Scholar]
  98. Niparko JK, Tobey EA, Thal DJ, Eisenberg LS, Wang NY et al. 2010. Spoken language development in children following cochlear implantation. JAMA 303:151498–506
    [Google Scholar]
  99. Padden CA, Humphries T. 1988. Deaf in America: Voices from a Culture Cambridge, MA: Harvard Univ. Press
    [Google Scholar]
  100. Petitto LA. 1987. On the autonomy of language and gesture: evidence from the acquisition of personal pronouns in American Sign Language. Cognition 27:11–52
    [Google Scholar]
  101. Petitto LA, Marentette P. 1991. Babbling in the manual mode: evidence for the ontogeny of language. Science 251:50001493–96
    [Google Scholar]
  102. Pudans-Smith KK, Cue KR, Wolsey JLA, Clark MD 2019. To Deaf or not to deaf: that is the question. Psychology 10:152091–114
    [Google Scholar]
  103. Pyers JE, Senghas A. 2009. Language promotes false-belief understanding: evidence from learners of a new sign language. Psychol. Sci. 20:7805–12
    [Google Scholar]
  104. Quadros RM, Lillo-Martin D. 2007. Gesture and the acquisition of verb agreement in sign languages. BUCLD 31: Proceedings of the 31st Annual Boston University Conference on Language Development H Caunt-Nulton, S Kulatilake, I Woo 520–31 Somerville, MA: Cascadilla
    [Google Scholar]
  105. Quadros RM, Lillo-Martin D. 2018. Brazilian bimodal bilinguals as heritage signers. Languages 3:332
    [Google Scholar]
  106. Quinto-Pozos D. 2008. Sign language contact and interference: ASL and LSM. Lang. Soc. 37:2161–89
    [Google Scholar]
  107. Reilly J. 2006. How faces come to serve grammar: the development of nonmanual morphology in American Sign Language. See Schick et al., 2006 262–90
  108. Reilly J, McIntire M. 1991. WHERE SHOE: the acquisition of Wh-questions in ASL. Papers and Reports on Child Language Development104–11 Stanford, CA: Dep. Linguist., Stanford Univ.
    [Google Scholar]
  109. Robinson O, Henner J. 2018. Authentic voices, authentic encounters: cripping the university through American Sign Language. Disabil. Stud. Q. 38:4 https://dsq-sds.org/article/view/6111/5128
    [Google Scholar]
  110. Rosen RS. 2004. Beginning L2 production errors in ASL lexical phonology: a cognitive phonology model. Sign Lang. Linguist. 7:131–61
    [Google Scholar]
  111. Rosen RS. 2008. American Sign Language as a foreign language in U.S. high schools: state of the art. Mod. Lang. J. 92:110–38
    [Google Scholar]
  112. Sandler W. 2012. Visual prosody. Sign Language: An International Handbook R Pfau, M Steinbach, B Woll 55–76 Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton
    [Google Scholar]
  113. Sandler W. 2017. The challenge of sign language phonology. Annu. Rev. Linguist. 3:43–63
    [Google Scholar]
  114. Sandler W, Lillo-Martin D, Dachkovsky S, Quadros RM 2020. Sign language prosod. y. In The Oxford Handbook of Prosody C Gussenhoven, A Chen Oxford, UK: Oxford Univ. Press. In press
    [Google Scholar]
  115. Schembri A, Wigglesworth G, Johnston T, Leigh G, Adam R, Barker R 2002. Issues in development of the test battery for Australian Sign Language morphology and syntax. J. Deaf Stud. Deaf Educ. 7:118–40
    [Google Scholar]
  116. Schick B. 1990. The effects of morphosyntactic structure on the acquisition of classifier predicates in ASL. Sign Language Research: Theoretical Issues C Lucas 358–74 Washington, DC: Gallaudet Univ. Press
    [Google Scholar]
  117. Schick B. 2006. Acquiring a visually motivated language: evidence from diverse learners. See Schick et al., 2006 102–34
  118. Schick B, Marschark M, Spencer PE 2006. Advances in the Sign-Language Development of Deaf Children New York: Oxford Univ. Press
    [Google Scholar]
  119. Schick B, Williams K, Bolster L 1999. Skill levels of educational interpreters working in public schools. J. Deaf Stud. Deaf Educ. 4:2144–55
    [Google Scholar]
  120. Schissel JL, Leung C, López-Gopar M, Davis JR 2018. Multilingual learners in language assessment: assessment design for linguistically diverse communities. Lang. Educ. 32:2167–82
    [Google Scholar]
  121. Schlenker P. 2017. Sign language and the foundations of anaphora. Annu. Rev. Linguist. 3:149–77
    [Google Scholar]
  122. Shohamy E. 2011. Assessing multilingual competencies: adopting construct valid assessment policies. Mod. Lang. J. 95:3418–29
    [Google Scholar]
  123. Slobin DI. 1986. Crosslinguistic evidence for the language-making capacity. In The Crosslinguistic Study of Language Acquisition 2 DI Slobin 1157–249 Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum
    [Google Scholar]
  124. Slobin DI, Hoiting N, Kuntze M, Lindert R, Weinberg A et al. 2003. A cognitive/functional perspective on the acquisition of “classifiers. .” In Perspectives on Classifier Constructions in Sign Languages K Emmorey 271–96 Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum
    [Google Scholar]
  125. Snoddon K. 2018. Whose ASL counts? Linguistic prescriptivism and challenges in the context of parent sign language curriculum development. Int. J. Biling. Educ. Biling. 21:81004–15
    [Google Scholar]
  126. Spellun A, Kushalnagar P. 2018. Sign language for deaf infants: a key intervention for a developmental emergency. Clin. Pediatr. 57:141613–15
    [Google Scholar]
  127. Stone A, Petitto LA, Bosworth R 2018. Visual sonority modulates infants’ attraction to sign language. Lang. Learn. Dev. 14:2130–48
    [Google Scholar]
  128. Supalla T. 1982. Structure and acquisition of verbs of motion and location in American Sign Language PhD Diss., Univ. Calif San Diego:
    [Google Scholar]
  129. Thompson RL. 2011. Iconicity in language processing and acquisition: what signed languages reveal. Lang. Linguist. Compass 5:9603–16
    [Google Scholar]
  130. Thompson RL, Vinson DP, Woll B, Vigliocco G 2012. The road to language learning is iconic: evidence from British Sign Language. Psychol. Sci. 23:121443–48
    [Google Scholar]
  131. Twomey T, Price CJ, Waters D, MacSweeney M 2020. The impact of early language exposure on the neural system supporting language in deaf and hearing adults. NeuroImage 209:116411
    [Google Scholar]
  132. van den Bogaerde B, Baker AE 2009. Bimodal language acquisition in Kodas. Hearing, Mother Father Deaf: Hearing People in Deaf Families SL Hicks, M Bishop 99–131 Washington, DC: Gallaudet Univ. Press
    [Google Scholar]
  133. Vihman MM, Macken MA, Miller R, Simmons H, Miller J 1985. From babbling to speech: a re-assessment of the continuity issue. Language 61:2397–445
    [Google Scholar]
  134. Walle EA, Campos JJ. 2014. Infant language development is related to the acquisition of walking. Dev. Psychol. 50:2336–48
    [Google Scholar]
  135. Wood SK. 2013. Degrees of rootedness in acquisition of language: a look at Universal Grammar in homesigners and late learners of Libras PhD Diss., Univ. Conn Storrs:
    [Google Scholar]
  136. Woodward JC. 1973. Some characteristics of Pidgin Sign English. Sign Lang. Stud. 3:139–46
    [Google Scholar]
  137. Woolfe T, Herman R, Roy P, Woll B 2010. Early vocabulary development in deaf native signers: a British Sign Language adaptation of the Communicative Development Inventories. J. Child Psychol. Psychiatry 51:3322–31
    [Google Scholar]
  138. Wroblewska-Seniuk KE, Dabrowski P, Szyfter W, Mazela J 2017. Universal newborn hearing screening: methods and results, obstacles, and benefits. Pediatr. Res. 81:3415–22
    [Google Scholar]
/content/journals/10.1146/annurev-linguistics-043020-092357
Loading
  • Article Type: Review Article
This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was a Success
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error