Figure - available from: Frontiers in Psychology
This content is subject to copyright.
Cross-linguistic similarities of the signs of vet ekki and vet inte [do not know]. STS image of VET-INTE from STS dictionary ID: 17937 (published with permission).
Source publication
In second language research, the concept of cross-linguistic influence or transfer has frequently been used to describe the interaction between the first language (L1) and second language (L2) in the L2 acquisition process. However, less is known about the L2 acquisition of a sign language in general and specifically the differences in the acquisit...
Similar publications
This paper concerns the acquisition of the sign lexicon in L2 learners of Swedish Sign Language. Sampled data (conversation and narrative retelling) from a longitudinal learner corpus with 16 adult L2 signers was analyzed and compared with data from nine L1 signers. The use of three broad types of signs was analyzed: lexical signs, partly-lexical s...
This paper provides an acoustic description of /z/ and /z ʕ / in Tŝilhqot’in (Northern Dene). These sounds are noted by Cook (1993, 2013) to show lenition and some degree of laterality in coda position. Based on recordings made in 2014 with a single, mother-tongue speaker of Tŝilhqot’in, we describe their acoustic properties and examine their distr...
Teachers making errors in explanation that require subsequent self-correction is presumably common in education. However, it may be difficult to capture in research. In this study, teacher self-correction in the context of early childhood science education within a fictive frame was captured on video when documenting science activities over a prolo...
Citations
... In short, co-speech gestures help learners remember a new sign, but they could also block the early learning of the correct phonological values (e.g., handshapes) of iconic signs. On the contrary, Schönström and Holmström (2022) suggest that M1L2 learners outperform M2L2 signers on lexical acquisition since the M1L2 learners already have experience with iconicity in their first sign language. ...
... To our knowledge, there is no study in the L2/Ln acquisition of initialized signs and lexicalized fingerspelling. However, L2 learners do fingerspell words based on printed words in their spoken L1 languages (Schönström & Holmström, 2022), a point we return to in a later section on cross-language transfer. ...
... They also found that the M2L2 signers followed syntactic order from native Dutch. Schönström and Holmström (2022) found that the deaf M1L2 learners tended to use signs and sign modifications from their L1 sign language and International Sign. Cross-language influences are at work at all levels of language. ...
Additional language (L2/Ln) research largely focuses on learners whose first languages are spoken and who are learning additional spoken languages. In the past few decades, sign languages have become increasingly popular for hearing students in schools. These students must not only learn the vocabulary and grammar of sign languages but also manage a different modality (that is, the channels of production and reception of language) than their first language. This raises questions about the role of both language and modality in the L2/Ln learning of sign languages for non‐signers. In other cases, deaf and hearing signers of a sign language learn a different sign language, raising questions about L2/Ln learning in the signed modality. This Special Issue consists of empirical contributions and a conceptual review article that examine how language and modality shape the learning of sign languages as additional languages. Theoretical issues concerning learning a sign language as another language are discussed.
... (Leeson et al., 2020). De plus, certains chercheurs ont essayé de relier leurs travaux à des théories d'acquisition des langues secondes, ou à des théories linguistiques générales, par exemple la stabilité de la production (Hilger et al., 2015), le suivi référentiel (Bel et al., 2014 ;Frederiksen & Mayberry, 2019), l'influence translinguistique (Ortega & Morgan, 2015 ;Schönström & Holmström, 2022), l'aptitude langagière (Watkins et al., 2022) et l'apprentissage implicite (Hofweber et al., 2022). En outre, on note des tentatives pour soutenir la recherche en acquisition L2 avec la constitution de corpus d'apprenants L2M2 (Mesch & Schönström, 2018 ;Oviedo et al., 2018). ...
... Furthermore, some researchers have tried to connect to more general SLA or linguistic theories, e.g. production stability (Hilger et al., 2015), reference tracking (Bel et al., 2014;Frederiksen & Mayberry, 2019), crosslinguistic influence (Ortega & Morgan, 2015;Schönström & Holmström, 2022), language aptitude (Watkins et al., 2022), and implicit learning (Hofweber et al., 2022). There are also attempts to support SLA research through the construction of corpora from L2M2 learners (Mesch & Schönström, 2018;Oviedo et al., 2018). ...
... There are several anecdotal claims to the effect that transition from sign to sign is somehow easier and faster than transitions from speech to speech and from speech to sign. Such claims are rather poorly supported empirically, leaving an important gap to be filled (but see Schönström & Holmström, 2022). Other relevant questions to consider include how to distinguish finite and non-finite structures in any learner variety of sign language. ...
SLA research is characterised by a striking homogeneity in the linguistic, social and geographical data we as a field draw on. Such empirical homogeneity is a potential threat to the validity and scope of our models and theories. This paper focuses on a particular gap in our knowledge, namely the SLA of sign languages. It outlines an argument as to why the SLA of sign matters to general SLA research in terms of the empirical representativity, generalisability, and validity of the conclusions in the field. It exemplifies three domains where the study of language acquisition across modalities could shed important light on theoretical issues in mainstream SLA/bilingualism research (e.g. learner varieties, explicit-implicit learning, and crosslinguistic influence), and highlight some of the methodological challenges involved in such work.
(Article available with Open Access through DOI)
Upon arrival in Sweden, adult migrants are required to learn Swedish at the earliest opportunity. This requirement also extends to deaf migrants, regardless of their linguistic and educational backgrounds. This paper presents findings and experiences derived from a project focused on the multilingual situation of deaf migrants in Sweden. Some deaf migrants have acquired sign language skills from birth and have received formal education, while others have had limited exposure to language and have never attended school. Due to a scarcity of interpreters proficient in different sign languages and many deaf migrants lacking knowledge of such languages, it becomes imperative for them to participate in courses aimed at learning Swedish Sign Language (STS). This enables effective communication with the Swedish Migration Agency and other authorities through STS-interpreters. They are also required, similar to other migrants, to acquire proficiency in reading and writing Swedish. Paradoxically, Sweden imposes the same education duration requirements on deaf migrants as hearing who only learn one language. Consequently, deaf migrants encounter challenges in attaining sufficient language proficiency level for successful integration into Swedish society. The paper highlights challenges and emphasizes the importance of addressing the unique language-learning needs of deaf migrants to facilitate their successful integration.