Search

Game-based learning has had a rapid development in the 21st century, attracting an increasing audience. However, inclusion of all is still not a reality in society, with accessibility for deaf and hard of hearing children as a remaining challenge. To be excluded from learning due to communication barriers can have severe consequences for further studies and work. Based on previous research Augmented Reality (AR) games can be joyful learning tools that include activities with different sign languages, but AR based learning games for deaf and hard of hearing lack research. This paper aims to present opportunities and challenges of designing inclusive AR games for education of deaf children. Methods involved conducting a scoping review of previous studies about AR for deaf people. Experts were involved as co-authors for in-depth understanding of sign languages and challenges for deaf people. A set of AR input and output techniques were analysed for appropriateness, and various AR based game mechanics were compared. Results indicate that inclusive AR gameplay for deaf people could be built on AR based image and object tracking, complemented with sign recognition. These technologies provide input from the user and the real-world environment typically via the camera to the app. Scene tracking and GPS can be used for location-based game mechanics. Output to the user can be done via local signed videos ideally, but also with images and animations. Moreover, a civic intelligence approach can be applied to overcome many of the challenges that have been identified in five dimensions for inclusion of deaf people i.e., cultural, educational, psycho-social, semantic, and multimodal. The input from trusted, educated signers and teachers can enable the connection between real world objects and signed videos to provide explanations of concepts. The conclusion is that the development of an inclusive, multi-language AR game for deaf people needs to be carried out as an international c

In a previous study, our research group investigated the expression of irony in Italian Sign Language (LIS) and suggested that specific manual and non-manual markers signaled the signer’s meaning and attitude. The present research aimed at expanding those findings by analyzing whether these markers are used in irony recognition and whether they are language-specific. We designed an experiment in which we compared recognition of ironic remarks out of context considering three groups of Italians: Deaf signers, hearing signers, and hearing non-signers. Our aim was to verify whether the manual and non-manual markers we associated with the expression of irony in LIS constitute a reliable cue to detect irony and whether these cues were accessible to signers more than to non-signers sharing the same cultural background. Although the ironic intent in LIS was accessible also to hearing non-signers, we found, among hearing participants, that knowledge of LIS does improve accuracy in recognizing ironic remarks in LIS. This suggests that signers’ facial expressions and bodily movements do not solve a purely affective function, but are grammaticalized, at least to some degree.

When we utter something with the intention to communicate the opposite of what we are literally producing, assuming a mocking attitude towards our interlocutor, we are making use of irony. As far as we know, despite the vast literature on the status of irony markers (meta-communicative clues alerting the interlocutor that the utterance requires an ironic interpretation) in spoken languages, no research has been devoted at identifying irony markers in those languages that exploit the visual modality to convey meaning, i.e., sign languages. To start filling this gap, we administered to four Deaf native Italian Sign Language signers a Discourse Completion Task to obtain a semi-spontaneous elicitation of 10 minimal pairs of ironic/literal remarks expressing either compliments or criticisms. The analysis of this corpus revealed that: i) sentence meaning is expressed manually through the polarity of the evaluative lexical sign, ii) signer's attitude is expressed non-manually through mouth-corners up and down, iii) ironic remarks show a prolonged articulation, and iv) irony might be further signaled by non-obligatory non-manual and manual cues