Search

THE STUDY examined the role of sign language and fingerspelling in the development of the reading and writing skills of deaf children and youth. Twenty-six deaf participants (13 children, 13 adolescents), whose first language was Chilean Sign Language (CHSL), were examined. Their dactylic abilities were evaluated with tasks involving the reading and writing of dactylic and orthographic codes. The study included three experiments: (a) the identification of Chilean signs and fingerspelled words, (b) the matching of fingerspelled words with commercial logos, and (c) the decoding of fingerspelled words and the mapping of these words onto the writing system. The results provide convergent evidence that the use of fingerspelling and sign language is related to orthographic skills. It is concluded that fingerspelling can facilitate the internal representation of words and serve as a supporting mechanism for reading acquisition.

POPULAR ORTHODOXY about 'human nature' for the past hundred years has, by virtue of a naive, elementalistic 'materialism,' defined man as a 'selfish animal,' engaged in a struggle in which [...]

DEAF PEOPLE HAVE difficulty reading and remembering English script because of its sound-based orthography. Logographs (e.g., kanji, Arabic numerals) should not pose the same challenge because they are based on meaning, not sound. Little research has been conducted to test this theory's validity cross-culturally. The present study was an attempt to do just that. The first of two experiments tested immediate memory spans for word sequences of 20 hearing Irish, 20 prelingually deaf Americans, 20 hearing Japanese, and 20 prelingually deaf Japanese. For English words, deaf participants showed shorter memory spans than hearing participants, but memory spans were similar for deaf and hearing participants for words in kanji, the logographic system for Japanese writing. The second experiment tested memory span for Arabic numerals, with the same participants. Deaf English-readers showed shorter memory spans than their hearing counterparts, but deaf and hearing Japanese performed similarly.

ACCORDING TO ENROLLMENTS in schools for the deaf and data from the national census and neonatal hearing screening programs, the incidence of severe and profound childhood deafness in Australia is, and has been, less than commonly assumed. Factors implicated include improved medical care, mainstreaming, cochlear implants, and genetic science. Data for the United States, Britain, and other developed countries seem consistent with those for Australia. Declining prevalence and incidence rates have immediate implications for sign-based education, teacher-of-the-deaf training programs, and educational interpreting. There are also serious consequences for research, documentation, and teaching regarding Australian Sign Language (Auslan), and for the future viability of Auslan. Prompt action is essential if a credible corpus of Auslan is to be collected as the basis for a valid and verifiable description of one of the few native sign languages in the world with significant attested historical depth.

Byline: John T.E. Richardson (1), Alan Woodley (2) Keywords: approaches to studying; Approaches to Studying Inventory; deaf students; distance education; hearing loss; sign language Abstract: This investigation examined approaches to studyingamong deaf students taking courses by distance learning whopreferred to communicate using either sign language or spokenlanguage. In comparison with hearing students, the deaf studentsobtained higher scores on comprehension learning, surfaceapproach, improvidence and fear of failure. Whilst they obtainedhigher scores on reproducing orientation, their qualitativeresponses indicated that this was not because they had beendriven to use rote memorisation. In addition, the deaf studentsseemed just as capable as the hearing students of adopting ameaning orientation. In the specific context of distanceeducation, there were no differences in approaches to studyingrelated to the students' preferred mode of communication.However, communicating by sign language rather than speech haddifferent practical consequences for the students' effectiveworkload. Author Affiliation: (1) Department of Human Sciences, Brunel University, Uxbridge, Middlesex, UB8 3PH, U.K. (2) Institute of Educational Technology, The Open University, Walton Hall, Milton Keynes, MK7 6AA, U.K. Article History: Registration Date: 10/10/2004

Samplings of deaf and hearing sign language interpreters were studied to assess the effects of spoken English and sign language fluency on automaticity in word and sign recognition. The Stroop task was used. Responding in sign took longer and led to more Stroop interference than responding verbally. The inclusion of interpreters showed this response had nothing to do with hearing status. The deaf subjects showed more automaticity in identifying signs than words, with the reverse result for hearing subjects. This result was not affected by language fluency.

A studydetermined the receptive communication abilities of severely and profoundly deaf students using individual or combined communication standards such as audition, lip reading, fingerspelling and sign language. Findings show that severely deaf individuals perform well on all communication conditions except on signing. On the other hand, profoundly deaf students did equally well only on signing conditions. Results were analyzed and their implications on deaf education and communication programs were identified.

Ted Supalla, an associate professor of linguistics, and Elissa Newport, a professor of psychology at the University of Rochester's Sign Language Research Center, are analyzing sign language to find out universal linguistic principles and analyze the evolution of languages. Their research includes examining the verbs of sign languages and searching for proof that languages can be learned more efficiently during a particular period in childhood and early adolescence. Sign language and spoken language are generated in the same parts of the brain.