CALI FORt,liA :3TATE Ut'H~)ER:3IT'(, NORTHRIDGE
ENGLI:3H FOR THE DEAF CHILD
A Gr· a.ch.J ate Pr· oj ec t ·;::.t.J bm i t ted in p.:<.r- t i a.l s..9. t i :.f .:..c t i •::.n
of the r-equir-ements for- the degr-ee of Master of Arts in
Education - :3pecial Education
b::.-·
Cheryl
Ad~~
ins
n ..: :- Gr· .=...du at: e Pr· oj •?c t: c•f Cher-y 1
L~wrence
~'idl<
ins;. i -=· appr· oved:
R. Fleischer, Ed.D.
California State University, Northridge
ii
ACI<NCil.o.l LEDG Et·-1Et-..n S
To t-tm-1 and DAD, '"-'ith love, for· their· continued
encour-agement, lc•ve, and suppor-t;
To ELLEN SCHNEIDERMAN, Ph.D., for- her- invaluable
editor-ial assistance; and
To JENNIFER, my daughter-, for her- continued patience.
i i i
TABLE OF CONTENTS
ACKNOV.lLEDGEt-1ENTS •
ABSTRACT • • • • .
i i i
.......
vii
PROBLEt-1 STATEt·-1ENT
Cot-1t·-1UN I CAT I ON I t·. J ENGLISH A
MAJOR PROBLEM OF THE DEAF
CHAPTER I.
4
Deaf Adults in the Job Market
Post Secondary Training Programs
for the Deaf . . . . . • . • .
Functional English Language Levels
of the Deaf
• . . . • • . • . . . . • •
Summary • • . . . • • • • • • . • •
. . . .
CHAPTER I I.
t·,1Et10RY AS A PREREGHJI SITE
OF LANGUAGE • • . • •
14
1.!·
17
17
18
THE DEVELOPt·-1ENT OF LANGUAGE
20
The Analytical Mode . . • • •
The Gestalt Mode • . • • • .
Analytical and Gestalt Modes Both
Requisite but Insufficient ••
Appropriate Input and its
IrTipc~r·
tance
.
•
•
•
.
•
•
•
.
•
20
21
22
.
•
.
•
•
Does Manually Coded English Meet the
Criteria of Appropriate Input? • . .
Manually Coded English and
Short-term Memory • • • • • • • • . • • .
Does Amer i C,a\.n Sign Language t·'1eet the
Cr-iter·ia of Appr·opr·iate Input·'? • • .
Amer· i can Sign L,a\.ng•Ja.ge and
Shc·r· t-ter·m t-1emory• • . . • • . • • • •
Summary • • . • • . • • •
i ....
12
13
14
The Relationship between Memory and
Syntax and Morphology
Short-term Memory • • . • . • • • • . .
Visual Memory • • • • • • • • . • •
Phonological Memory • . •
Summar:;.-· •
CHAPTER I I I •
4
25
27
34
35
CHAPTER IV.
THE 8 I LINGUAL ADI...JANTAGES
3 "?'
The Linguistic Advantages • • • • • • • • • • •
One S tor· e Semantics;. Ad•. .·ant a.ge
• • • • •
The Morphological to Syntactical
Ad•....,. •.:-~.n t a.ge •
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
First Language Visual Adva.ntage • • • • • •
The Non 1 in gu i s;. tic Ad'·.Jan t ages:.
• • • . • . •
The Sociocultural Advantage • • • . • • • •
Semi-1 ingual ism ••
Summary . • • • • •
37
'JO
--·~1
38
39
40
40
43
45
CHAPTER tJ,
ENGLISH AS A SECOND
LANGUAGE • • . . • .
Simultaneous vs. Sequential
Second Language Acquisition
Acquisition vs. Learning Language
Learning and Formal Operational
Thinking . . . . •
Overuse of the t1on i tc•r .::..nd
Deaf Students • • •
Attitudinal Influences on
Second Language Learning Ability .
Affective Filters and Deaf Students
Fostering a Los Affective Filter .
Summar~/ .
CHAPTER
t....• I
•
46
46
48
49
50
52
54
55
56
PROVIDING LANGUAGE ACQUISITION,
NOT LEARNING - OR Hmo..l?
58
Acquisition of American Sign Language
as a First Language - How and Where? . . • •
American Sign Language Acquisition
In the Home • • . • • •
• • • . • . .
Cc•nf 1 i c t i ng Advice fr·c•m
the Experts
Par· en t Education
. . .
Amer·ican Sign Language in the Schools • • •
Tea.cher Pr·epara t i c•n in American
Sign Language • • • • • • • • • • • .
Amer· i can Sign Language: Fi r·st Language
Acquisition in the Preschool
Acqu i s:.i t ion of Engl i s:.h - How? . • . • •
Pidgin Sign English as a Simplified
Register for Second Language
59
59
60
62
66
67
68
71
.
71
English as a Second Language Technique • • .
Initial Silent <Receptive Onl)-')
Per· i od • . • • •
Communication • • • • • •
74
Ac qu is i t ion
.
.
.
.
.
·..
~··
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
75
76
English as a Second Language
Sequential Acquisition of
Morphemes and Syntax •
Summar·:;.-·
77
78
SUMMARY
80
LIST OF REFERENCES •
83
vi
?""BSTRACT
ENGLISH FOR THE DEAF CHILD
by
Cher·>-•1
Ad~·~ins
Master of Arts in Education Special Education
Because c•f the "age c•f mc•der·n communica.tic•n':.
-=·::.-'stems", deaf adult:. in the late part of the 20th
century f.:..ce r· ising unempl o)-•men t, under·empl c•ymen t, 1 Cd..•.J
v.•age-:., ar.d 1 itt 1 e advancement oppc•r tun it i es.
Their· pc•or
economic condition is largely attributed to poor English
language competence, v.Jhich i-:. r·equired fc•r upv.Jard
mobility in today 1 s Job market.
There are many obstacles to teaching English to deaf
children.
The first obstacle is the limited short-term
memory capacity of children in general, coupled with the
need to acquire language before the age of eight to ten.
English was manually coded to aid in its acquisition.
doing sc•, hov.Jever, an over·vJhel mi ng 1 oad was p 1 aced c•n
short-term memory.
The second obst.:..cle is confrc•r.ted after· examining
the requirements of "appropriate input" for language
In
acquisition.
Manually Coded English does not meet two
out of three of these requirements, since its focus is
not on the input, but its form, and it cannot be
sufficiently syntactically simplified.
American Sign Language/English bilingualism is
offered as a viable alternative.
The best time to
introduce English a-::. a Second Language <ESL)
i-::.
E-hct~,•m
be after children are ten to twelve years of age.
tc•
This,
hovJever, bring-:. on the third and fc•ur·th c•bstacles:
ho•...•
a.re deaf children to a.cquir·e American Sign Language as. a
fir·st
larP;~uage,
and hOIJ.J ar-e they· to acquire English as. a
-e.econd 1 anguage.
Deaf adults within the deaf community are seen as
the best alternative to teaching American Sign Language
to deaf children as a fir-st language.
It is suggested
this be undertaken as soon as the hear-ing loss is
identified in an otherwise "normal" preschool setting.
Pidgin Sign English is examined and -:.een to be
appropr-iate ESL input for the acquisition of English
1 anguage
s~-::i
11 s.
b~l
a competent Amer·ican :=:ign
Language/Engl i _s.h bi 1 i rtguad •
The inordinate time delays seen between when hearing
losses are identified and when deaf children enter school
is observed to be the sixth and last obstacle.
Parents'
emotions and cc•nfl icting advice by the "exper-ts" ar·e
examined as contributing factors.
Teacher-organized
parent gr-oups ar-e offer-ed as one solution.
viii
A good deal
particularly in
of
the lives of deaf
the work place,
individuals,
depends upon
ability to use the English language.
discussed in Chapter I.
Therefore,
their
This situation is
one important goal
education of
the deaf must be English
•:c•mpetence.
Toward that end,
of
language
sy-:.tems c•f signing in
In
English word order have been developed.
yea.rs, hc•wever·, t1anua 11 y Coded Engl i s.h
:3 i mu 1 t a.n eou s. Communi cat i c•n ( :3 i rn-Cc•rn)
the pas. t
(1'"1CE>
f
e~.-,,
and
have r· ec e i ··./ed ver-y
s.tr·c•ng cr-iticism- bc•th frc•m or-ali·:.ts and s.ign language
The abi 1 it)-·' c•f
pr·oponents.
these s.;.-•s.tems to fos.ter·
English language competence has been questioned.
I f t·'1CE
and Sim-Com do not foster- English language competence,
Or· a 1 i s.m a 1 one is. unacceptab1 e
what ,,,Ji 11?
examining
~~-.~hy
tc• many.
In
f"'1CE and Sim-Com de• not foster English
language competence, we should be better· able tc• find a
pr-actical
alter-native.
Language and memor-y ar-e intricately inter-twined
<Cur-tiss 1981), with memor-y pr-er-equisite to language
de·v·el opmen t
<t'klaugh 1 in 1978) •
Ther·efor-e,
Cha.pter· I I
examines bc•th .:..•Jdi tor-y/phc•nol ogi ca 1 a.nd vi s.ua 1 -:.hor- t-ter·rn
and 1 on g- t er·m rnemor· y •
Sh c•r t- term rnerm:.r· y
1
i s sh o~,o.m
t c•
2
limit language acquisition by limiting the syntactic
complexity of the language that individuals are able to
Lan •;;;JU .::•.QC7.' de\.·'t:· 1 opt·w:n t. i ·::. de pendent
kind of input CKrashen 1981a).
•.1 pon
a par· tic u 1 ar·
Therefore, Chapter III
r-e··-liew'E. the nor-mal development c•f language and the
par-ameter-s of the input r-equir-ed.
Both MCE (a ter-m
encc•mpassing s.ever·.:d for·mula.ted codes) and Amer-ican Sign
La.nguage ar·e di -:.cussed in 1 i gh t of the-:.e input par-ameter-s
and shor-t-ter·m memor-y r-equir·ements..
Amer-ican Sign Language <ASL)
As a r·esul t,
is pr-oposed as an
alter-native avenue for- language acquisition.
A second pr-oblem is then r-aised in Chapter- IV; if we
use Amer-ican Sign Language to teach language to deaf
childr-en, how ar-e these deaf childr-en to lear-n English?
Bi 1 ingual ism and Engl is.h a.-:. a Secc•nd La.nguage <ESU have
r-eceived a gr-eat deal of attention in the last few year-s
CAlber-t & Obler- 1978; Ber-nbaum 1972; Mclaughlin 1978;
Vaid & Lamber-t 1979; Vihman & Mclaughlin 1982; and
Woodwar-d 1978).
Amer-ican Sign Language/English
bi 1 ingual ism emer-ges. as an excel! ent educational methc•d
to pr·oo...-'ide English 1 anguage competence.
c.ar·r· i e-:. addition a 1
'=·DC
Bi 1 ingua1 i':.m
i a 1./emot ion a 1 benefits a'::. v.Jell •
Chapter- V addr-esses a third pr-oblem; when is the
appropr-iate time to teach English as a Second Language to
deaf student-:. v..•ho us.e Amer·ican Sign Language?
Contr·ar·y
to common belief only fifteen year-s ago, a second
3
language has been shown to be acquired best
chi l dr·en
'Jh o h a.•..;e enter· ed f or-ma.l C•per- at i c•n a.l
B•J t f c•r·rna 1
t•.
oper-ational
thin~<
in g.
thinking is not usually achieved until after-
chi 1 dr·en I"H\'v'e r-eached ten tc• f if teert ;.-•ear·s c•f age.
Chapter- VI addr-esses our fourth and fifth problems;
how ar-e deaf childr-en to acquire ASL as a fir-st language
and English as a Second Language.
Deaf adults ar-e viewed
as the best avenue thr-ough which deaf childr-en may learn
ASL as a fir-st language.
PSE is seen as appr-opriate
second language input for ESL acquisition.
CHAPTER I
COMt-1UNI CAT! ON IN ENGLISH
A MA.JOR PROBLEt'l OF THE DEAF
Within the 1 ast century, deaf adu 1 t'S!. have dr·opped
fr·om econc•rrdc par·ity IJJith hear·ing people to being
economically disadvantaged, with high unemployment,
widespread underemployment, 1 ov,• wages, and 1 imi ted
advancement oppor·tunitie'S!..
The'S!.e economic disadvantageE.
are attributed to the changing job market and its higher
need for 1 iteracy and communication sin 11'5!., E.pecifica11y
in the English language.
Current English language levels
of the deaf are discussed.
Deaf Adults in the Job Market
During the 1800's, the deaf were economically equal
with hearing people <Moores 1987).
This is because the
Industrial Revolution's new manufacturing and mechanical
industries required hand dexterity and concentration.
These skills were not dependent upon hearing and speech
<Menchel 1984).
Laborers tended machines which performed
many varied but routine operations <Collier 1985).
Early
schools for the deaf were motivated by charity to care
for and "provide an education that wc•uld lead to gainful
employment which even into the 20th century was seen as a
4
5
trade" <Menchel 1984, p. 73) •
Over· ha 1 f of the deaf
adult-::. at that time vJer·e emplc•yed as far·mer-::., 'a.hoemaker·s
in shoe factories, mill operators, mechanics, carpenters,
and teachers <Moores 1987).
The 1870 ~ s usher·ed in new pc11JJer s.c•urces,
specialization, organization, and technology <Collier
1985 and Beard 1969).
Oil, electricity, and petroleum
replaced coal and steam (Collier 1985). At the end of
World War II in 1946, the United States, Germany, and
Japan joined England in technological and industrial
advances.
International financial and industrial
c•r· gan i z at ions appeared.
Gover· nmen t s bee arne su perv i sor· s.
o.nd regula tors of the econc•m::r·· <Collier 1985).
The job
market changed to many more white collar, managerial, and
supervisory type jobs (Jacobs 1974).
According to
Cr·amma t te ( 1987) , this trend i -,::. 1 i kel y to continue.
He
reports that the occupational status of hearing males
i ncr·eas.ed thr·ee sea 1 e points from 1962 tc• 1973 on the
Socic•economic Index <SED.
Postsecondar·y educatic•n,
previously considered a well rounded education for the
wealthy c•nly, not for· '-/Ocational prepar·ation,
~.>..•as.
now
viewed as a "doorway to career opportunities in business,
industry, and technology" <Menche1 1984, p. 73).
For· the deaf, however·, voca.tional choices r·emained
very limited.
In 1959, the majority of deaf workers were
st i 11 empl o:r·ed as. semi -s.k i 11 ed or •Jnsl< i 11 ed assembl >"'-1 i ne
factory workers.
Their main occupations included
6
-:.h oema~( er· s,
car· pent er· s.,
makers, clerical
c c•o~~ s.,
s.eams. t r· es.ses,
workers,
c a.b in e t
and printers <Moores 1987).
1974, Jacobs reported 87% of deaf workers still
as manual
In
employed
labc•rer-s, as compar-ed to less than half c•f
the
In 1 983, Ar·ms. t r· on g r- epc•r- ted 79/. of
the
ma.l es and 70/. of
the wc•men of Ga 1 1 audet' s. nongr-adua t i ng
a lumnai v.Jere employed in c 1 er i ca 1 and manu a 1 ,.i obs.
Deaf people commonly find themselves underemployed
with l i t t l e opportunity for- advancement and "mor-e often
than not intellectually super-ior-
to hear-ing people
employed in the same type of wor-k"
Cr·ammatte <1987)
<Moores 1987).
r-epor·ted 76% c•f hear·ing male-::. but only
57% of deaf males wer-e upwar-dly mobile.
He also repor-ted
that 92.7% of hear·ing-impair·ed pr·c•fe-s:.sic•nals/manager-'0:.
have cc•11ege degr-ee":., while
onl~,...
51
.8~~
of hear-ing
profes-s:.i c•na 1 s/managers hold such degr-ees.
Hear-ing-impair-ed pr-ofessionals' median salar-y is $21,957,
while hear-ing pr-ofessionals' median salary is $23,663
<Cr-ammatte 1987).
v..1ages. as s.ti 11
In 1987, Moor-es reported deaf wor-kers'
22% bel ow their- hear·ing s.ibl ings.•
Ter-zian (1980)
r-epc•rted that of
workers who r-equested new work,
such opportunities.
the
41% of
total
rJJho r·eques.ted and completed r·etra.i n i ng.
r e 1 at ed t c• their- deaf n e-=.s.
of deaf
those wer-e offer-ed
This r-epr-esents a
indicated the reasons for- denial
33~~
of only 20%
Deaf IA•orker-s.
of retraining wer-e
However· , Cr· armna t t e
r·epc•r· ted per-ceived job di -:.cr-imination
dct~J.Jn
( 1 $'87)
f r·om 64/. in
,, .
7
1960 to 50% in 1982.
peep 1 e wer· e
e~< c
Terzian (1980) reported that deaf
lu ded from emp 1 oymen t in office s-t< i 1 1 s.,
management training, and supervision "because no training
was available" and "because they did not have basic
education for the training".
By 1965, unemployment among the deaf was four times
that of the hearing population.
A decade later, Jacobs
<1974) reported unemployment among the deaf still four
times the hearing rate.
In 1980, Terzian reported the
r·.ate c•f dea.f IJnempl o::.>me•nt at
8.8~'~
tc• be
hi•;~her·
for· the
deaf in New Jersey than the New Jersey population in
general, but the labor force participation was higher
than the New Jersey population.
Terzian (1980) also
reported 27% of the deaf receiving Social Security
Disability Insurance or Supplemental Security Income.
Accc•r·ding tc• Collier· (1985), the de·...,·elopment of
nuclear power has pushed us into the "formative stage of
the Third Industrial Revolution which will undoubtedly
dwarf the First <1750-1871) and Second <1871-present)
Industrial Revolutions and may change the entire range of
hum.an r·el ation-::.hips." (p. 776).
In 1974, Jacobs predicted
that the employment picture for the deaf would worsen
without drastic changes to the prevailing educational
picture.
A great many deaf people are employed in jobs
that are being eliminated by technology.
According to
Terzian (1980), deaf women's main occupation is that of
clerical workers.
Their second most popular occupation
8
is machine
operator~
primarily in the area of printing.
Printing is also the most popular occupation of deaf
males.
However, the printing trades and clerical work is
rapidly changing with the increased use of computers
<Terzian 1980).
The deaf are also concentrated in
"manufacturing which is expected to register declining
employ•ment .and i-:. quite ·sen·::.itive to up-:. a.nd d•:•J..,ms of the
ecc•nom>'"
(~•lat-:.on,
et. al., 1983, p. 6).
blue-collar laborers be retrained or will
~·lill
these
they be
u n emp 1 O)-'ed?
Advances have been made in the establishment of
postsecondary programs for the deaf, but these programs
still offer a limited range of semi-skilled occupations.
The deaf are underrepresented in professional and
a.dministr·ative
c•cc•Jp&.tion~.
Underemployment is still
deaf adults face.
r·esource.
0Aht~.•:;.n ~
et • .:..1., 1983).
the most serious problem which
The deaf represent an unusued national
"By decreasing the full
income potential of
deaf people, underemployment causes deaf people to become
alienated from the mainstream of American experience"
OA!B. t son , e t • a 1 • , 1 983 , p .
7) •
It lowers self-esteem,
"decreases the social role by generating the disapproval
atta.ched to lov.Jer pr·odu•:ti\.>it>>" and
con~.tricts
opportunity to purchase food, clothing and shelter, art,
recr·eation c•r c•ther· leis.ur·e
Cv~ats•:.r,,
et.a.l., 1'7'83, p. 7).
9
Pc•st Secondar':l Trainin9 Programs for· the Deaf
The vocational
training programs in schools for the
deaf "no lc•nger- meet the incr·easingl:l complex technical
demands of the working world" <Moores 1987, p. 312).
With only one exception, in River-side, Califor-nia, no new
pos. t -:.ec on dar-~.> pr· ogr· a.m-a. f c•r· the deaf v,ter e e-a. tab 1 ish ed f r· om
\J~or·1
d
~-'lar
I I ( 1 946)
tc• 1 964.
Hot. . Jever, the per-i c•d fr·om
1965 to the pr-esent accor-ding to Moor-es (1987),
represents .9-n unher-alded rev•::dtJtion in the establ i-:.hment
of postsecondary pr-ograms.
were established in 1972.
Twenty-seven new pr-ograms
This number- increased over-
time, and in 1'?83, there v.Jere 102 postsecondar·::.-· pr-ogr-ams
for the deaf within the United States.
Terzian repor-ted
in 1980 that 61% of the 1000 New Jer-sey deaf surveyed had
some type of vocational
tr-aining.
However, only 5% of
the deaf in this New Jersey sur-vey had college degr-ees
while 15% of the hearing in New Jersey had college
degr-ees.
Postsecondary progr-ams have been documented to
aid the deaf in achieving upwar-d job mobility <Moores
1 987) and impr-o·v·e ear·n i ng-:. <Ter·z ian 1 980) .
NevJ .Jer·sey
NTI D graduates ha.ve been '::.hc•t.•m to be quite ·:.ucces-a.fu 1 and
competitive in the labor- mar-ket <Watson, et. al., 1983).
Accor-ding to Moor-es <1987), however-, postsecondary
progr-ams still concentr-ate on an "unnecessar-ily limited
range of occupati•:•n-a.".
Cr·a.mmatte (1'?87) repc•r·ted tha.t
hearing-impaired women face a "double barrier that tends
to push them into a limited selection of so-called
10
women's jobs" (p. 75).
He also reported that 62.9% of
hearing-impaired professionals were employed in
educational
instit•Jtion-5.•
Over half
<57~{)
c•f the female
hearing-impaired professionals surveyed were teachers.
Terzian <1980)
reported that 94% of deaf women in general
were vocationally trained as sewing machine and laundry
machine operators, clerical workers, cooks and
dishwashers, and data entry key punch operators.
Sixty-four percent of deaf men were trained in the areas
of machine operators,
including linotype,
textile machine
and woodworking machine operators, printing and photo
engraving, carpentry, auto body, upholstery, and shoe
repair.
According to Moores (1987), analysis of deaf
people's scores on the Stanford Achievement Test, General
Aptitude Test Battery, and Wechsler Adult Intelligence
Scale show the intelligence of the deaf
that of the hearing.
Moores (1987),
tc• be equa.l
to
therefore, believes
that "deaf individuals should have no more difficulty
than anyone else in meeting the cognitive demands of any
job"
(p. 326).
He contends that deafness itself
precludes few skilled occupations.
Problems arise not because of the cognitive
demand-:. c•f a .job but because of di ff i cu 1 ties.
in communication, especially insufficient
command of the English language <Moores,
1987, p. 326).
Researchers,
to poor personal
therefore, attribute job difficulties
and social skills, as well
as deficits
11
in basic reading, writing and computation skills
O.·h t son , e t.
a.l . , 1 983) •
Po-:. t -:;:.ec on dar·)'' vc•c at ion a 1
pr·epa.ratory pr·c•gr·am-:. fc•r the deaf have found it
necessary to include courses in remedial English and
math.
The teachers of these classes state that deaf
students come to them lacking basic academic skills.
Although NTID reports raising English skills over one
year in just four quarters, this is insufficient for
many· c•ccupa t ions <Cr·anda 1 1 l 980) •
Rehabi l i t.e. t i •::.n
counselors who refer deaf students to postsecondary
programs consider current postsecondary training for
the deaf t•::. be adequate.
The)-·' bl arne their· de.;..f
clients' employment problems on their poor prior
education (Moores 1987).
Crammatte <1987) states that
"the key bottleneck to further education occurs not at
the college level, but at secondary and elementary
Supervisors of deaf employees regard their
employees to have limited opportunities for
advancement, even with further training.
Yet,
supervisors of deaf employees also regard 95X of their
deaf employees to be average or better in job
performance.
These supervisors consider their deaf
employees·' biggest pr·obl em to be communication Ct1c•ores
1 '7'87) •
"The greater the communication problems whether
verbal or nonverbal, the greater the likelihood of
discriminatory viet.,Jpoint-:." (Levinson 1984, p. 88).
12
Menchel (1984) reported a high correlation between
receptive communication skills, reading and writing and
job performance as rated by supervisors.
-::.ki 11 '=· are cr·i tica.l
Good writing
in helping to compen-::.ate for- any
deficiencies in '...-·er·ba.l communicatic•n
-:.~{i
11 s <Le•·.Jin":.on
1 984) •
Functional English Language Levels of the Deaf
Six year- old deaf children ar-e often r-epor-ted to
be on a par with hear-ing childr-en in pr-er-eading skills
<Moor-es 1987), but they fall behind rapidly when theircommand of the English language fails to suppor-t their
r-eading effor-t-::.•
In 1963, less than 10% of deaf
childr-en over- the age of ten wer-e r-epor-ted to r-ead at a
fourth gr-ade level.
In 1964, and again in 1970, nine
year old hear-ing childr-en wer-e r-epor-ted to r-ead better
than 15 year- old deaf adolescents.
All of these
childr-en r-ead within the 4th gr-ade r-ange <Moor-es 1987).
A 1966 r-epor-t showed that deaf students' r-eading levels
impr-oved less than one gr-ade (fr-om grade 2.6 to 3.4) in
five years time (fr-om 11 to 16 years of age)
<Moores
The 1983 SAT-HI <Hear-ing-Impair-ed) r-eading scor-es
wer-e up one gr-ade level from 1974.
However, hearing
students r-eading scor-es impr-oved corr-espondingly across
the nation fr-om 1970 to 1983 (Moor-es 1987).
Moores
(1987) reported no r-eading gains for deaf students
(1
13
relative to their hearing counterparts.
In 1985,
Arm·::.trong r·epcar·ted the .a\..·erage of deaf 17 ::lear cal d-=:. tea
s t i 1 1 be a t t he 4 t h g r· ad e r· e ad i n g 1 e•v e 1 .
Summ.ary
The deaf compare poor 1 ::l tea their· hear· i ng
counterparts economically in the job market as jobs
become more specialized and depend more upon
communication skills.
The great majority of the deaf
continue to be employed as semi-skilled and unskilled
1 aborer-=:..
Pcaor· ccammunication in En9l ish i-=:. blamed for·
their unemployability, underemployment, low wages, and
little advancement opportunities.
Supervisors of deaf
employees, rehabilitation counselors, and postsecondary
training teachers all point an accusing fin9er at "the
poor prior education" of the deaf as the reason for
these employment difficulties.
The avera9e deaf 17
year old reads at a 4th grade level.
Therefore~
the
remainder of this paper will be devoted to examining
ways to improve En9lish lan9uage competence.
'
CHAPTER II
1'1Et10RY AS A PREREQU IS 1TE OF LANGUAGE
The ability to learn language is dependent upon
preexisting cognitive abilities such as
auditory/phonological and visual short-term memory
<t'kLau•;~hl
in 1'7'78).
Chapter 11
ex~,mines.
the differ·ences
between phonological and visual short-term memory and
their· con nee t ion t;.Ji th the deve1 opmen t of syntax and
mor· ph o 1 og)-' .
The Relationship between Memory
and Syntax and Morphology
The relationship between memory and language is
difficult to study because they are so intricately
intertwined, and sc1ence may not selectively damage
and/or sever and observe the living human brain.
Oc c a=· ion a.l 1 y, a.n in d i vi du a 1 is f Ctl_ln d v,ah c•:.e 1 if e
circumstances have led to an opportunity to study the
r·el at i •:ansh i p of 1 anguage tc•
memor~.··
a.nd cognition.
Curtiss (1'7'81) has compared and contrasted the language
skills of two such individuals.
Genie was isolated from
interaction with others from the age of twenty months to
thirteen years.
This situation provided science an
opportunity to study language and memory delay in an
14
15
otherwise intact brain with severely limited auditory and
visual stimulation or input.
Antony is a mentally
retarded boy who was studied at the age of 6.5-7.2.
This
situation provided an opportunity to study language and
memory development in a brain with a cognitive deficit
which received normal auditory and visual stimulation or
input.
Both cases suggest a connection between auditory
short-term memory and expressive syntax and morphology.
Genie, deprived of auditory/visual stimulation or input,
showed linguistic damage or severe delays in syntax and
morphology- not in semantics.
Antony, severely
cognitively delayed, alternately showed linguistic damage
or severe delays in semantics- not syntax and
morphology.
Both Genie and Antony had auditory
short-term memory abilities similar to their
syntactic/morphological abilities, not to their semantic
abi 1 i ties..
Genie~s
mental age increased one year each year
-:.i nee her di scc•very.
By 1'7' 1_...-··2 tc• 20 ye•ar·s. of .9.ge, =-he
was in the concrete operational stage of cognitive
deve 1 opmen t per· f •:trm in •;;! semantic a.l 1 y at c•r·
year· 1 e•v•e 1 •
~tb•:tve
.9. ten
Her· ·:.em antic s.oph is tic a. t ion far· sur· pa s.-:.ed
her 3.0 year level auditory short-term memory.
Her
primitive utterances had "acquired very little syntax or
morphc•l c•gy" <Cur· t i ·:.s. 1 981 , p. 21) •
while
Antony~s
On the other hand,
IQ estimates ranged from 50 to 56 and his
16
mental age was 2.9, unlike Genie, he often spoke
semantically inappropriate sentences but "had an
impressive range of syntactic structures and considerable
mc•r·phological elaboration" (Curtiss 1981, p. 23).
Studies of language placement in the brains of bilinguals
.a 1 sc• -:.h ov.J d i ssoc i .;:.. t i
em -
or· separ .ate p 1 ac em en t - of
syntax and morphology from semantics
1978;
Bellin~
(Albert~
Obler
Natsopoulos 1976; McLaughlin 1978; and
Paul:.tc•n 1980).
Preoperational and concrete operational
intelligence
appears necessary for the development of semantic ability
but is not necessary for the acquisition of syntax and
morphology.
And conversely, syntax and morphology are
tied to brain plasticity and must be acquired before the
age-:. of eight to eleven.
The acquisition of semantic
ability is not constrained by age in the same way.
Shor· t-term t'1emor•r•
Short-term, or primary memory is a working memory
which processes
information for short
measured in seconds <Kintsch 1970).
periods of time
Long-term memory
receives information from short-term memory, organizes it
into meaningful elements, and retains it for longer
periods of time in a semantic form <Kintsch 1970 and
t·-..lor·man 1 '7'72) •
Because of the extremel : .-· brief time per·iod involved,
both visual and phonological short-term rnernory are able
17
to process only a few units at a time.
A "normal" child
of three who has already mastered a good deal of English
syntax has a short-term memory capacity of only two units
<Cook 1977).
Thi-:. -:.hart-term memor:y• cap.,...cit)'· increa.se-:.
as a child gets older.
An average adult has a visual
memory capacity of six and an auditory memory capacity of
eight and one-half <IchH::al.<Ja 1983).
Visue<.l Memory
Visual short-term memory stores material presented
simultaneousl:-,', t..\lhether that mater·ial
is pictor·ial c•r· .9.n
array c•f letter'S!. <Ichil<at..,Ja 1983 and Nc•rman 1972).
Chi 1 dren bel ow the age of five are bel i e·. . .·ed to prc•cess
language mainly in visual/simultaneous short-term memory.
Th i -:;:. i -=· probably due to a heav::.' reliance •JIX•n ge-:.ta 1 t
language learning <McLaughlin 1982) and an insufficiently
rapid familiarity with the intricacies of the English
language.
At about the age of five, coincidentally when
they enter school and normally begin receiving extensive
phonics play and instruction, children normally begin
processing sequentially presented material, including
language, mainly in phonological/auditory memory (Cook
1 977 and I chi ~~awa 1983) •
Phonological Memory
Phonological/auditory short-term memory stores
material presented sequentially, whether that material is
verbal or visual pictures <Ichikawa 1983 and Norman
18
1972).
Short-term phonc•logical memory has limited s-::mtax
capacity.
Thu-:., -::.yntactic cc•mplexity can overload
phoncdogical memc•r·y, resulting in a loss of cc•mprehen-:.ion
<Cc•ol< 1977).
Klima and Bellugi (1979) explain:
When we hear spoken language, we must process
and store a stream of ongoing speech until we
have taken in enough to understand structure
and meaning -we must remember, for instance,
from the beginning to the end of a sentence
or proposition in order to grasp a
communication (p. 88).
In other words, if we are unable to take in enough of
the communication to understand its structure and
meaning, then we will be unable to decode it as a whole
and -:.tore it into short-ter·m memc•ry or tr·an-:.fer and
-:.tore it into long-term memory.
Fc•r exarnple, a student
with insufficient phonological memory, given the
sentence "The man is raking the leaves", is as likely
to understand and choose a picture of a man, a rake, or
leaves as a match, rather than a picture of the whole
cognitive unit of the actic•n, a man raking leaves.
Cc•ol~
( 1977) shov.Js fc•r·ei gn 1 earner·s -::.imi 1 ar· to
native children in their limited capacity for syntax.
That is, phonological memory is shorter in a foreign
language and increases with language mastery.
Thus,
optimal language input for both first and second
language acquirers would be a specialized input which
progresses with their language mastery.
81Jmmar· 'r'
Sufficient phonological short-term memory appears
19
to be neceE.sa.r·y for· the de•v•el c•pmen t of '=·Yn tax and
morphology, and it is necessary during brain plasticity
<ages one to about ten).
It has been noted that
virtually all sequential input is processed in
phonc•logical s.hor·t-ter·m memory while vir·tually all
simultaneously presented input is processed in visual
shc•r·t-term memor·;'.
Young chi ldr·en (zer·o to fi•-.le years
of age) are shown to process language simultaneously in
vi s.u a 1 s.h or t- t er·m memor >'.
Short-t errn rnemor >·' is
determined to limit language acquisition by limiting
the syntactic complexity of language which the
individual can process and understand.
CHAPTER Ill
THE DEI...-1ELOPMEt-H OF LANGUAGE
Shor·t-ter-m memor-y places limit-:. c•n the quantity of
language which an individual can pr-ocess and under-stand.
Chapter- III examines two alter-nate methods of language
development; analytical and gestalt.
The-:.e tv.Jo methods
use and load -:.hor·t-ter-m memor·y differ-ently.
It is.
pr-oposed that the type of language input which the child
r-eceives is r-elated to the child's ability to stor-e
i nfor·ma t ion in to memor-y.
The par-ameter·-:. and necessity c•f
appr-opr-iate input (as defined by Krashen 1981a) to
language develc•pment ar-e then es.tabli-:.hed.
FinC~.lly·,
t1anua 11 y Coded Engl i s.h <MCE) and Amer· i can Sign Language
<ASL) ar-e di-:.c•Js-:.ed in r-eiation tc• the"".e inp•Jt par·ameter-s
and the loads which they place on shor-t-ter-m memor-y.
The Analytical Mode
The analytical mode of language learning maKes use
of sequential, phonological memor-y and is the easiest
mode for- listener-s to r-ecognize.
In this mode one wor-d
at a time is 1 ear·ned, e.g., in 1 abel ing common ob.jects
1 iKe ba 11 , bi r·d, and mi 1 K <t'lcLaugh 1 in 1982) .
Language learner-s vary along a continuum as to how
20
21
much they use or depend upon each of the two language
development mode-:.•
Learner·s ,,,Jho rely mainly upon the
analytical mode to develop language acquire referential
and labeling functions first.
They then string nouns and
objects together, with functors and connectors emerging
1 a~.t <r--1cLaugh 1 in 1982) •
The Gestalt Mode
According to Mclaughlin (1982), much early language
development, for both first and second language learners,
involves the gestalt mode.
It is used basically in
conversations for requesting, summoning, and discussing
<Peters 1981).
1-::ey 1 anguage
Learners using the gestalt mode attend to
segment~.,
e.g., the number· c•f syllables.,
intonation, pitch, and amplitude contour.
They
assimi 1 ate common 1 y repeated grc•ups c•f •. ,mr-d~- or·
in to simu 1 taneous, vi su.a 1 memory.
commonly repeated V.K•r·ds or
phr~.se-:.,
phr~.~-es.
Some exa.mpl es of these
called for·mulaic
input, are "Open the door", "What's that?", and "Look at
tha.t".
Peter-s ( 1981) believes b.abbl ing is the gestalt mode
emer·ging.
Accor-ding to Peter--:. (1981), the extent tc•
which a language lear-ner- uses the gestalt mode is
influenced by such environmental factors as "the degree
to which the maJor- car-etaker-, usually the mother, accepts
or- r-ejects the child's language pr-oposals independently
22
of the general acceptance of the child" Cp. 47).
If the
receptive and general language ability of the caretaker
is poor, the gestalt mode is particularly difficult to
understand and thus accept.
Its use can then be expected
to deteriorate as a function of natural selection - there
being no rev.Jard.
The competenc;..·· of the language model
i~.
thus an important factor in gestalt language development.
Vihman and Mclaughlin (1982) believe the gestalt
mode i -:. the r·e-:.u 1 t of cc.rnmtJn i cat ive needs exceeding
linguistic competence, or phonological short-term memory
capabilities in the language being developed.
Analytical and Gestalt Modes
Both Requisite but Insufficient
Under nor·ma 1 , natura 1 1 anguage development
conditions, for both first and second language acquirers,
analytical and gestalt methods are used in interlinked,
complex
combination~.
<Mclaughlin 1978).
Creati'-.;e
lB.ngu21.ge evc:.l·..,·es naturall:;..-· in combination b:y• gestalt
utterances breaking up and recc•mbining
1~-.tith
parts of
other gestalt utterances and/or with analytically learned
vJor· ds
( Nc laugh 1 i n 1 982) •
For· ex amp 1 e , " Open the door"
and "look at that" can become "Open the box" and "look at
me", and later evolve into "look at me open the big
icebox".
The analytical and gestalt methods of language
devel c•pmen t are cc•mpl emen tar·>-' and
nece~.s21.r·;..•
but
insufficient fc•r competent and complete fir-st language
23
(Ll) and second language <L2) development.
Dulay,
Burt~
Krashen <1982) caution that too heavy reliance upon the
ana 1 yt i ca 1 mode adv&.nce<.:. 1 angu&.ge 1 earner·<.:. r.o further·
than the beginning or intermediate stages of acquiring a
L2.
Krashen (1981a) cites L2 classrooms which emphasize
conscious grammar as examples of a heavy reliance upon
analytical learning.
At the same time, Dulay,
Burt~
Krashen (1982>, and also McLaughlin (1982), stress that
the gestalt mode is an efficient and effective initiator
of a first or a second language, but that it is only an
initiator.
Gary <1978) and Dulay, Burt
~
Krashen (1982)
cite the audio-visual method of L2 learning as an example
of a
heav~l
reliance upon gestalt learning.
Lear·ners
using the audio-visual method memorize and orally mimic
pattern<.:. of language
by_l_is_t!~·i_~·~_!_'?_tap~~~~·.J!"•i_ch
repeat
words, phrases, or sentences.
Dulay, Burt
~
Krashen's (1982) cautions have direct
application to the teaching of English to deaf students,
t.'Jho are cc•mmonly taught through an emphasis. on cons.cio•Js.
gr·ammar and patter·n memorization.
Accor·ding tc• Levine
(1981), deaf childrens' English language learning depends
largely upon rote memory.
Deaf children are required to
memorize the visual appearance of words piece by piece.
They memorize the use of voice, breath, and articulatory
organs.
They memorize word order, e.g., to look at, to
look like, to look out, and to look for.
Le•,..Jine (1981)
attributes deaf individuals' syntactic problems to the
24
rigid subject-verb-object patterns, e.g.,
Key, which are drilled in isolation.
the Fitzgerald
Additionally
hinder·ing cognitive development, a.ccording to Levir•e
(1981), is that the variously drilled words, phrases, and
sentences are not related to each other or to a greater
bc•dy of cognitive
~~nowl
edge.
The wor·ds chosen to teach
lipreading are chosen because they are easy to read on
the lips.
The words chosen to teach articulation are the
ones which are easiest to speaK.
The words chosen to
teach reading are the ones which are the easiest to read.
According to Levine (1981):
To learn verbal expression in this slow,
piece-by-piece way is not only linguistically
unna.tural, it is psychologically incompatible
with a small child·'s developmental
imperatives <to explore and experience) and
an older pupil's informational needs <p. 72).
As 1 ong ago as 1967, Lenneberg emphasized tha. t l<nowi ng
language is nc•t in Knowing hc•w to
spea~<
intelligibl;'
nor in being able to react properly to memorized words
and phrases.
~~nowl
According to Lenneberg <1966),
the
edge c•f 1 anguage is demonstr·a ted by the abi 1 it;' to
cr-eate no·-.-·el
-;:.entences;
that is, -;:.entence-:. v.Jhich the
child has never heard before.
We can conclude,
analytical
therefore,
that both the
and gestalt modes are necessary for Ll and
L2 devel c•pmen t.
But,
they are i n-:.uff i c i en t
to pro\.>i de
competent and cc•mplete Ll a.nd L2 development.
yet a missing ingredient.
Kr-ashen's (198la)
There is
term for
25
that missing ingredient is "appropriate input".
Appropriate Input and its Importance
According to Krashen (198la), "appropriate input",
or· natur·al, meaningful communication at the apprc•pr-iate
le'v·el, is .s. r·equir·ed ingr·edient in acquir-ing a fir··:.t ora ':.econd language.
Unfor·tunatel:>', hot-\•e•v•er·, accc•rding
to Krashen <198la), a lar-ge por-tion of language spoKen
by adults is not appr-opriate input for- language
develc•pment becau':.e it is neither·:
1)
anal:>-·ticall~..-
•Ali thin the phoncdogical, shor-t-ter·m memor·y capa.cities
of children or- second language learners; nor 2)
r· egu l ar- , pat tern ed segment'=· of 1 an gu age, vJh i c h ar· e
available as gestalt per-ception.
Krashen (1981a), and many others who have studied
and analyzed the language used by parents, believe that
caretaker speech is an excellent teaching language
because it contains a high proportion of appr-opriate
input.
Krashen's (198la) analysis of caretakers'
speech breaks it down into three broad essential
ingr·edients.
The first ingredient is the "here and now".
This
component refers to talking about things that are going
on right her·e and right now.
This r·e-=.tricts the r·ange
of topics and provides learners with extralinguistic,
contextual material
to aid in their comprehension of
what is said to them.
26
The second ingredient is "communication".
This
component refers to a focus on what is said, its
meaning, not the form of the input, or how
linguistically correct the input is.
a crucial
Comprehension is
ingr·edient.
The third ingredient of appropriate input is
"syntactic simplicity", or "rough tuning"
learners'
linguistic abilities.
to the
Children's language
develops by understanding language which is a little
beyond their current abilities.
Thus, appropriate
input varies among learners and must progress with each
learner's individual
language development,
i.e.,
in
sentence complexity, number of tranformations involved,
types of sentences, repetition, modeling, and speed of
delivery <Landes 1974), without including too much
"noise", or language that is not understood.
Krashen (1981a)
five categories.
breaks down "rough tuning"
into
In the first category, "lexicon",
younger children receive a more restricted vocabulary.
The second category is "well-formedness".
Caretaker
speech is exceedingly grammatically correct and more
intelligible than adult-adult speech.
category is "length".
The third
Caretaker speech is shorter and
less subordinated than adult-adult speech.
In the
fourth category, "rate", younger children receive
slower input.
complexit~..'.
The fifth category is "propositional
Caretaker
~-peech
roughly matches the
(l
27
child's number of propositions per utterance depending
upon the linguistic maturity of the child.
When considering the acquisition of a first
language by deaf children, there are two possible
1 anguages; t1anua 11 y' Coded English
Language.
~.nd
American Sign
The fed 1 owing two sect i c•n-:. wi 11 explor-e each
of these possibilities as they r-elate to the
aforementioned char-acter-istics of appr-opr-iate input.
Does Manually Coded English Meet
the Cr-iter-ia of Appropr-iate Input?
Manually Coded English CMCE)
is a ter-m which
encompasses var-ious for-mulated codes, e.g., Linguistics
of
~Ji-:.ual
Engl is.h CLOVE), Seeing E'l:.sential Engl is.h CSEE
l), and Signing Exact English <SEEII>.
The various MCE
codes wer-e invented by individuals, or groups of
individuals, for the specific pur-pose of assisting the
teaching of the English language to deaf children.
SEE
II is. the mo-:.t r-ecent r-e'. d-:.ion in MCE development.
As
such, it is the code of preference by the great
maJority of code users in their- effor-ts to teach
English to deaf childr-en.
SEE II is, therefore, also
the code most studied and disputed as to its ability,
as a code, to teach language.
Fc•r example, in pcdnting
out the differences between MCE and language in
general, Leo......'ine <1981) states that a la.nguage "is.
fashioned by its users and their cultur-e, not by
1 inguist-:."
(p. 104).
Levine (1981>
in-:.i-s:.ts that
•
28
language is more than its rules.
in-:. trumen t.
eqtJal
it"
It is a living
It gr·ov.Js and changes and "nc• invention can
<p. 104).
MCE contains the first of Krashen's <1981a)
essential
and now".
ingredients of appropriate input,
The use c•f the "here and now"
three
the "here
is under· the
control of the speaker, regardless of whether the
speaker is using a code or a language.
MCE systems, however, do not contain the second or
third ingredients of appropriate input.
Codes, such
SEE I I , by design have a.dded many invented f or·ms of
prefixes, suffixes, and verb tenses, as well
as
specific rules for the use of ASL vocabulary <Levine
1 981) •
In opposition to the second definition of
appropriate input, MCE's purpose is to focus on the
form of the input, not on the meaning of the input.
MCE,
therefore, does not meet the second of Krashen's
(1981a)
listed essential
ingredients of appropriate
input.
of three rule".
This rule states that if the English
word is the same in tv.Jo of three ar·ea-,:. <semantic
meaning, sound, or spelling),
used.
the same ASL sign is
This rule results in many signed sentences which
make no semantic sense at all.
The SEE II signed
sentence "My nose is running" uses the ASL sign for a
per-:.on running down the street.
This pr·esents the
29
r·ecei•v•er-E. of the cc•mmunicatic•n with the comical mental
picture of a detached nose with spindly little legs
r·unn i ng down the :.tr-eet.
"Stand t.tp" and "Get up" u1:.e
the ASL signs for "stand", "receiving an object", and
the directionality pointer "up", which make the
r·eceiver·s. c•f the cc•mmun i cation wc•nder- hov.J they are
supposed to stand on the ceiling and how they are to
physically obtain the ceiling in their possession.
The
difference between "linguistic" signs (Levine's term
for· LOVE, SEE I, and SEE II> and ASL "i:. the differ·ence
between expressing a word and expressing a concept"
<Levine 1981, p. 103).
Compr·ehension, or a focus. on
meaning, is not a crucial ingr-edient of MCE.
The third essential ingredient of appr-opriate
input is syntactic simplicity, or rough tuning.
The
actual classroom use of MCE has been shown to be so
grammatically incorrect that it ha:. c•ften been ter·med
"frequently unintelligible" <Charrow 1976; Cokely
~
Gav.J 1 i k 1 973; 1"1ar ~{. ov.Ji c z 1 974, 1 977-1 978; S t c•k c•e 1 '7'75;
and Woodward 1973).
Erting's <1980)
interaction study
between young hearing-impaired students and their
teachers. using t·-1CE showed that the teacher'=· signs and
her· s:.peech did not s:.ernantically match and vJer·e
sometimes contradictory.
In another study <Marmor
~
Pettito 1979), two teachers of deaf children chosen for
their SEE II signing skills failed to sign everything
they said either· rnc•r·phologic&.ll>-'/s::lntactically or·
30
semantically.
They signed declarative sentences and
questions incorrectly more than 90 percent of the time.
Th e'i:.e twc• teacher·'=· 'i:.h cowed 83 percent and 25 percent
subject and/or verb deletions and 12 percent and 67
percent other deletions.
Relative clauses were always
ungrammatical, and pronouns and verb tenses were
ungramma tic a 1 tv.JC•- th i rd'i:· c•f the time.
The s. tud~·l
concluded that gross omissions of correct English
language structure -:.temmed from gros':. omi -:.si ens of
obl igator·y t1,t0rds. and mcor·phemes fr·com signing, ncot the
mixing of American Sign Language and English grammar,
as neither teacher· u-:.ed much American Si grt Language.
Thus, MCE also fails to meet the third essential
ingredient of appropriate input, as it is not
syntactically simple and cannot be sufficiently and
effectively shortened in order to be "roughly tuned" to
the beginning language learner's linguistic maturity.
It is MCE's inability to be effectively shortened which
also causes it to fail as both analytical and gestalt
perception.
These perceptua 1 mcodes. ar·e hea•..,•i 1 y
dependent upon the learners' short-term memory
capacities..
Manually Coded English and Short-term Memory
MCE adds a great number of signs, i.e., prefixes,
suffixes, and verb tenses, to each sentence <Marmor and
Petti to 1 '7'7'7') •
31
SEE has at least 22 adjective suffixes, ten
personal ending suffixes, and 40 noun
suffixes. SEE I also has 35 general
prefixes. There are symbols for 43
handshapes, 2 hand positions, 6 directions
for these hand positions, and a variety of
placement explanationl:.• The reader must
learn (i.e., memorize) the notations before
he can under·stand how to for·m a SEE l:-i gn
( L e•v• i n e 1 9 8 1 , p • 1 0 3) •
These added signs significantly lengthen and interrupt
tho:t
na~:ur·.::;..l
flov.J of e·...,·em commonly repeated phr·ases with
their attention to form.
difficult at best.
This makes gestalt perception
Analytical per•:eption also becomes
difficult for average six year olds, with short-term
memor}' capacitie:. of fc•ur :.equentiall?' pr·esented units.
F c•r- aver age three year- o 1 ds tAli t h :.h or· t- term memor· y
capacities of two, purely analytical language
compr·ehensi on is impo:.si b 1 e.
Since "language cannot be understood by interpreting each word or phrase as it arrives" <Norman
1972, p. 280), when presented with Manually Coded
English, many deaf children are left with no other
alternative than to merely lear-n vocabulary- not
language.
In summar·y, NCE :.ystem-::. cc•ntain only one of
Krashen~s
<1981a)
three essential
ingredients of
appr·opri.:;..te input; the "here and not,.J".
These -e.y:.tems
do not contain the two remaining essential ingredients;
a "focus on communication" artd "synt<:r.ctic sy·mpl icity".
Additionally, in its attention to form, MCE systems
32
appear to be problematic for beginning language
learners through either gestalt or analytical
per·ception.
Does American Sign Language Meet
the Criteria of Appropriate Input?
Many sources agree that American Sign Language is
a legitimate, fully developed language.
Among these
sour·ces are Fr·c•mKin &: Rodman (1983), Levine (1'7'81), and
Moores (1978).
Kantor (1983) concludes that ASL
parallels spoKen languages in the expressive
development of semantic relationships.
FromKin &:
Rodman ( 1 983) con tend that a 11 major· aspects of ASL
resemble spoKen languages and that universals exist
across signed and spoKen languages despite the
differ·ent mod&.litie:..
Le. .line (1'7'81> compar·es. ASL v.Jith
Japanese, which has no articles, practically no
pronouns, and no singular/plural distinction in
general.
l.A.tords they•
FtJrther, .Japanese prepositions come after· the
modif~,,,
and descriptive clauses come· befor·e
the nouns they modify.
as a proper language.
Yet, Japanese is not questioned
There is no universal syntax.
Levine ( 1981) i nsi :.ts that
e\ler·~~
1 anguage has its. ot.,m
r·u 1 es which have been establ i -:.hed c••..Jer· time b:>" the
language community.
Moores (1978) contends that as a legitimate
language, ASL has both formal and restricted forms.
As
a legitima.te l.anguage, ASL mus.t, ther·efc•r·e, &.lsc• have a
33
caretaker form.
Kantor (1983) documents the modeling
used by two profoundly deaf mothers to their profoundly
de.:..f childr·en.
The mothers . . ASL :.electively• omitted
highly analytical ASL modulations, preferring simpler
fc•rm:..
Fr·c·m~nn
& Rodman
<1983) document that deaf
children of deaf parents exposed to sign language from
birth parallel the language stages of hearing children.
Kantor <1983) outlines the ASL language stages through
which deaf children pass.
She describes the utterances
of the deaf mothers in her study as well formed, short,
repetitive, redundant, and simplified.
She add:. that
deaf mothers appear sensitive to their deaf children . . s
linguistic levels.
These mothers altered their
language levels as their· childr·en . . -:. language levels
e\,.c•l ved.
In ten month . . s time an older child's mother's
u t ter·ances mo··./ed from n.ami ng c•bJ ec t:. to a focu:. on the
properties of objects.
As with MCE, the ASL user is in control of the
"here and now" content.
We can conclude also that ASL,
being a language, is used to communicate meaning, not
form.
Fromkin & Rodman <1983) document the purpose of
l.anguage being communicatic•n, vJith car·etaJ::er· for·ms used
largely to control behavior <Krashen 1981a).
Kantor
<198:3) ha:. shc•IA•n that ASL is simplified to a car·etakerf c•rm by c ompe tent user·-:;..
all
Th er ef c•r· e, ASL con f or·m-:. to
three of Krashen . . s (l981a) essential ingredients of
appropriate input.
34
Amer· i can Sign Language and Shc•r· t-ter·m Memor·•t
According to Lenneberg (1967), "languages are
different patterns produced by identical basic
principles." <p. 364).
ASL differs basically fr·om
English in its primarily morphological patterning and
its primarily simultaneous nature
1979).
<Klima~
Bellugi
Both of these characteristics reduce the number
of s.hc·r·t-term memc•r·:;• units r·equir·ed for- compr·ehen-=:.ion
of a thought unit or sentence.
Thus, ASL lends itself
to both simultaneous visual/gestalt perception and
sequential phonological/analytical per-ception.
While syntactic languages alter meaning by adding
wor-ds, morphological languages alter meaning by
changing the endings of word-:..
Fc•r- example, while
English, Spanish, and French add function wor-ds and
adhere to a r-igid word order-, American Sign Language,
Russian, Latin, Tur-kish, and Japanese Kanji change a
1 imi ted n•Jmber of word endings.
Language, being a visual
Amer· i c ar1 Sign
language, alters wor-ds or
signs b:;• changing a 1 imi ted number· of mo•-._•ements.
Fc•r·
example, slight but standar·dized mc•vement-:., chartge
nouns to verbs, singulars to plur-als, time r-efer-ences
(e.g., frequently, to r-egularly, or to a long per-iod of
time), locations <using the signing space or the body),
and pr-onouns, things, and places <e.g., changing "I
give you" to "You give her") (Baker
~
Cokely 1980).
,, .
35
The
vi-e.u.E~.l
natur·e of ASL allows it teo cut it-:.
requisite number of short-term memory units even
further, becoming a primarily simultaneous language.
For example, while other morphological
languages must
use sequential vocal words to express "I give you",
i.e., subject, verb, predicate noun, in ASL this
sentence is but one movement performed within specific
signing space.
Note that this sentence is essentially
the :.amemovement ,,..,hen changed to "You give her".
is on 1 y the specific -:.i gn i ng space v.Jh i c:h has.
It
clr.;).rtt,;:l'2d,
In :.ummar ::.··, ASL caret a~< er· s.peec h c con for· m-e. t co a 1 1
three of Krashen's (1981a) required parameters of
appropriate input while additionally cutting down on
the required number of short-term memory units for both
analytical and gestalt language perception.
StJmma.ry
This chapter· e:":amined both the
an-::..1~.-·tical
ge·:. t a 1 t modes. of 1 an gu age deve 1 copmen t •
.:o.nd the
It noted
th.E~.t
gestalt perception can be limited by environmental
factors, such as the caretaker's language level.
The
cooperation of the gestalt and analytical modes was
seen to be essential, but insufficient, to competent
and ccomplete language de,lelopment.
Apprcopriate input,
as defined by Krashen (1981a), was examined and
determined to be the missing ingredient.
~'ICE
'=·1'-::.tems vJer·e di-:.cu-:;.-:;.ed a.nd
:.hco~;m
teo fai 1 a-:.
--·-----~
---·- ·-- ---
=----· -·-- -
------- _. ---- ---·- ---
- - -·-- -- ·-- -·--- ---
36
appropriate input.
This is because MCE does not focus
on the input itself, i.e., communic.:..tic•n, and it cannot
be sufficiently syntactically simplified.
The natur·e c•f ASL was
e~<amined.
As a la.nguage,
not a code, ASL was determined to have a caretaker
form, v.Jhich b;,·· competent us.er·-:. meets all
thr·ee of
Krashen's (198la) essential ingredients of appropriate
input.
Additionally, being primarily a morphological
and simultaneous language, ASL places a much lighter
load on short-term memory.
CHAPTER It.}
THE BILINGUAL ADtJANTAGES
ASL,
as a. 1 a.ngu.:::c.ge,
ha.~.
the abi 1 i ty to pr·ovi de
a.ppropr-ia.te la.nguage input, i_•Jhile t·-1CE
The r-emaining question,
therefor-e,
S!'~.tems
de• nc•t.
involves determining
the best method thr-ough which deaf children can learn
English.
Bilingualism has fluorished throughout
the
world for centuries, pr-obably because there ar-e many
advantage~.
to being bi 1 ingual.
obvious soc i a 1
advantages.
advantage~.,
In addi tic•n to the
ther·e are other- mc•re subt 1 e
This chapter- discusses the linguistic and
non 1 i ngu i s.t i c a.dvan tages of bi 1 i ngua.l i ·::.m.
I t then close-:.
VJi th a di -:.cussi on of the prob1 ems of -;:.emi -1 i ngua 1 ism and
doub1 e -:.emi-l ingual i-:.m.
The Linguistic Ad\,..antages
Bi 1 ing1Jal is.m has sever·al
1 inguistic advantages.
Unlike monolinguals, bilinguals process and store
1 in gu is tic i n formation seman t i c a 1 1 y •
mc•r·e cc•gn i t ivel >' f l•?X i bl e.
a further· ado..lan tage.
Th i -:.
maJ~: es
them
ASL/Engl i s.h bi 1 i ngua 1 i
~.m
Acqu i r· i ng a more i nf 1 ec tiona 1 ,
mor·phol ogi ca 1 L 1 fol1 C•VJed b>' a mor·e SJ-'n tactic L2 is
easier than
the reverse.
37
has.
38
One Store Semantics Advantage
The semantic meanings and lexicons of bilinguals are
stored in the brain in a single, unitary system and are
deeply linked to br·oader conceptual de•-lelc•pment.
HotJJever, the morphol c•gy and syntax of the var· i C•tJS
languages of a bilingual are stored separately CAlbert &
Obler 1978; Bellin & Natsopoulos 1976; Curtiss 1981;
Mclaughlin 1978; and Paulston 1980).
Input in either of
a bilingual's languages is processed for meaning in this
combined s.emantic
s~..>s.tem.
~·!or·ds.
ar·e categorized artd
stored in long-term memory as part of a network of
meanings, contrasting and categorizing with other words,
e.g., "good"
'·./s.•
"bad", "hot .jazz" not "hot waltz", and
"animals" including "dog", "kangaroo", and "whale" <Cook
1 977) .
Because of this semantic chunking of words, despite
the language of input, bilinguals are able to use both or
either language to establish categories.
Further,
established categories aid in acquiring the lexicon of a
<;:.ec c•nd 1 angu age <Lamber· t 1 '7'72) •
The Morphological
to Syntactical Advantage
Lenneberg <1967) believes. t.ha t a 11 1 anguages are
equa 11 ~' complex and ar·e 1 e.:..r·ned tAli th equa 1 e.:..se
nor-mally developirtg childr·en.
Yet, ther-e
rna~.,...
b~..>
be an
advantage for· .:c. bi 1 ingu.:c.l t.•Jhose fir·s.t language is rnor·e
mor-phological and whose second language is mor-e
39
syntactical, rather than vice versa.
Lado (1957)
SIJ':.pec t s that ;
going fr·om a functic•n word signal to an
inflection is more difficult than the
r·ever·se. Ther·e i -=· reas.on to bel i e\-'e that
such rni gh t be the ca.se because even in their
native language, adrJlt-s:. ccantinue to lea.r·n nevJ
words long after their ability to learn new
i nf 1 ec t i can-s:. and new sound-:. appear·s pr·et t)"'
vJe 1 1 1 os t ( p. 63) •
In c•ther· vJor·d-:., gcaing from a more inflectional,
morphological first language, liKe Latin, Russian,
.Japanes.e KanJi, or American Sign L.s.nguage, to a more
syntactic language, liKe English, would be easier than
First Language Visual Advantage
A third linguistic advantage of bilingualism may
be specific to the acquisitic•n caf Amer·ican Sign
Language as a first language.
ASL can be learned
earlier than spoKen languages because of the earlier
maturation of the "motor area, particularly the hands
and face" <WhittaKer 1980, pp. 42-3), and "the visual
cortex prior to the auditory cortex" <Curtiss 1981, p.
18).
Hearing children of deaf parents and of both deaf
and hearing parents
<Prinz~
Prinz 1979), and deaf
children of deaf parents <Kantor 1983), exposed to ASL
from birth sign as early as five months of age.
At 16
meant h -:;. of age, t h el' have been shown to h a•.,..•e ac qrJ i r· ed
"the abi 1 i ty tea
a.s~~
question-:. and to cc•mbi ne and
recombine elements. c•f language in novel yet a.ppropr·iate
I
40
ways" <Moores 1980, p. 12).
I t h a~. a 1 ~.c• been -:.h ov.m
that hearing children of hearing parents exposed to
-:.ign have acquir-ed
~.poKen
langtJage ear·lier· than nor·mal
<Holmes & Holmes 1980).
However·, consider·ing the la.te date at which most
deaf childr·en ar·e exposed to Amer·icar. Sign Language,
this is cur-rently only a statistical and per-haps moot
advantage.
It is, hot)Jever-, impor-tant tc• note that the
br-ain is equally ready to lear-n either- a mor-e
syntactical or- a mor-e mor-phological language and eithera spoKen or- a signed language at appr-oximately the same
time developmentally.
The Nonlinguistic Advantages
Bilingualism has definite effects upon cognition,
but those effects are dependent upon sever-al variables.
The most impor-tant of these variables ar-e: a)
sociocultural; and b)
the method used to develop the
second language, i.e., "acquisition" or<t''kLaugh 1 in 1978) .
"learning~
The following sect i c•n r·evi e~o.Js the
sociocultur·al advanta.ge.
Method-:. of developing a
second language will be discussed in the next chapter.
The Sociocultural Advantage
Accor-ding to Padden <1980), culture is the main
influence on people-'s beliefs and actic•ns.
t1a~.lotJ.J
(1977) defines culture as a tool which individuals use
to adapt themselves to their environment.
He str-esses
Q
•
41
,, ·I
that individuals who are unsure as to their cultural
affiliations display debilitating resentment, anxiety,
and s.elf-hate.
According to Schewe (1979), under normal
. I
conditions, children develop their sense of culture
through continuous, informal explanations of hundreds
upon hundreds of daily experiences.
However, since
over 90 percent of deaf children are born to hearing
parents who do not know sign language <Moores 1987),
the great maJority of deaf children are deprived of
1 angua.ge .:..nd a sys.tem for- nc•r·ma 1
communi cat i c•n.
ever~.··
d-E~.)-·'
As a r-esu 1 t, man:/ deaf i ndi··.Ji dua 1 s do
not have any native language or cultur-e because of this
lack of commurdcatic•n beh,.Jeen their· p.ar·ents and
themselves (Tr·::o-·bus 1980) •
Ste•./ens. ( 1980) de-=:.cr i bes
these deaf individuals as being left in a "cultur-al
1 imbo".
Sch 1 esi nger and t·-1eadCIIAI <1972) believe this.
linguistic and cultural deprivation is the cause of
deaf chi 1 dren ·' -::. devel opmen t-:..1 1 ag-s;. in au tc•nomy,
initiative, and competenC)-' or- ir,du:.tr·y, IAlhi•:h the)-'
con:.ider- es.-s;.ential tc• impr·c•ving cc•mmunication
lear-ning
inter-per-':.on~.l
achievement.
'=·~<i
11 s,
r-elations.hip-:., and academic
They attr-ibute deaf
childr-en~s
poor
self-im.age to dela::.>s in acl<nc•wledging or· rejecting
their auditor-y "handicap" and to being deprived of
contact with successful deaf adults.
Castellana <1972) r-elates deaf childr-en#s poor
·I
42
self-e-:.teem tc• Ma:.low and Er-icson-'-:. heir·ar·chy c•f ba.-:.ic
human needs.
Maslow and Er-icson believe that
individuals str-ive unyieldingly for- the most basic of
their- need-:..
Ea.ch 1 ower- 1 e'-lel need mu-:.t be met befc•r-e
the next higher- level need may be enter-ed, or- even
consider-ed.
For- example, hungr-y people thinK only of
fc•c•d and disr-egar-d :.elf-esteem, a higher- 1 evel need.
And people star-ving for- belonging or- self-esteem expend
a 11 of their- ener-gy• towar-d pr-ocur· i ng that, di -:.r·egar·di ng
a )•et higher- 1 evel need, 1 ~~~e a.cademic achievement.
People in control of the education of deaf childr-en and
society at lar-ge who do not accept Deaf culture and its
language, ASL, ar-e, ther-efore, blocKing the
satisfaction of deaf children-'s most basic needs and
pr·eventing their· self-actualiza.tion.
Accc•r-ding tc• Lane
(1980), these people disguise:
a pr-oblem in bilingualism as one in medicine,
and the fai 1 ur·e of the c•ral major-it>' to come
to gr-ips with a minority language is
disguised as a. constitutional flaw in tha.t
minority. The deaf ar-e indeed handicapped,
but it is a handicap entir-ely within ourpower- to remo . . . . e.
It is bor·ne of an age old
ignorance, linguistic bigotr-y, the mystical
belief in the pr-imacy of one-'s own language,
which must be conquer-ed throughout the wor-ld
before any nation can be truly indivisible
before groups of nations can be tr-uly allied
( p.
6) •
Padden (1980) defines cultur-e as a group of
people's set of lear-ned behavior-s, including theirlanguage, values, behavior-al rules, and traditions.
43
.Just a.s other· 1 angua.ge groups ha'·.Je their· m.oJn cu 1 t•Jr·e,
Deaf people have their
C•IJ..tn
cu 1 tur-e, too <The capita 1
'D' her-e, as in other literature, refers to individuals
v..ti th deaf cu 1 ture.) •
That is, the Deaf have their·
OIJ..tn
-=·et of acceptable and unacceptable behaviors which ar·e
different fr·om hearing English behaviors, e.g., eye
contact, and the use of speech or exaggerated mouth
mc•vemen t s <Padden 1 980) •
The Deaf a 1 sc• have their c•,. . m
tr·aditions and values, artd they ha\..'e their· own
language, ASL.
According to Padden (1980), language is
one of the main cohesive ingredients of culture.
Therefore, ASL is able to "encourage the development of
a ·'Deaf identity . . and pro··.lide a r·eady r·eplacement for·
the native language many children never experience"
<Trybus 1980, p. 208).
Levine (1981> has stated that the t.o,tays in which
significant others evaluate individuals directly
affects the individuals' conceptions of their
ab i 1 i tie-=·, both academic a 1 1 ~,... and 1 in gu is tic a 1 1 y.
Therefore, teachers of deaf children who use ASL, and
incorporate Deaf cultural attitudes as well, would be
assisting their students in the students' Journeys
toward -:.el f-ac tua 1 i za t i or1.
Semi-1 ingua.1 ism
"Additive bi 1 ingual ism" is defined ::..s situations
in which L2 learners are motivated to add a valued and
44
respected second language to their equally valued and
respected first language <Oller 1981).
However,
lear·nir,g ASL fc•r o·-ler· 90 per·cent of deaf children,
i.e., those with hearing parents, is not additive
b i 1 in gu a 1 i sm.
I t can be com par· ed t c• vJh at 01 1 er· ( 1 981 )
terms "subtractive bilingualism", in which "minorities
are coerced by 'national education policies and social
pressures of various sorts to put aside their ethnic
language fc•r· a natic.nal langu.:<.ge" <p. 16).
Accc•rding to Stevens (1980), manual cornmunicatic•n
has been described for years as bad English and
suppressed in order to assure that deaf students would
acqui~e
English.
Normal deaf elementary children have
tr-aditionally nc•t been allcll..o.Jed to have deaf teacher·':. in
order to protect these students from the deaf teachersJ
···poor Engl i ·:.h ,. .:..nd ·' de~.f ism:.... (Stevens 1980) •
Un t i 1
the early 1970's and 1980's, virtually all classes for
the deaf below the age of twelve were oral <Moores
t/Jave·' which has -:.wept the cc•urttry in r·ecent ;..··e.:..r·:.,
stating that it has unfortunately not brought with it a
change in content or form of instruction.
Instead,
manual cornrnurtic.:..tic•n i;. vie,_..Jed a;. a methc•d of teaching,
nc•t a 1 angu.:..ge.
Skutnabb-Kangas <1976) contends that subtractive
bilingualism may result in double sernilingualism.
feels. th.:..t minority children
rrt~Jst
have their- mother
She
45
tongue as the instructional medium in order to develop
it to the same degree as monolingual native speakers.
If the mother tc•ngue is not de··./eloped, -:.he t_,_tarns, the-:.e
minority children will not learn a second language
pr-c•per·l>--·- e·...,·en if it is the irtstruction.:d medium.
Erting (1978) descr-ibes double semilingualism as a
mediating var-iable thr-ough which society imposes its
str·ucture on new gener·;;..tions, repr·c•dtJcing sc•cial and
vocational str-uctures.
This this situation exists is
thirty percent of the deaf are functionally illiterate
and that eighty per-cent of those that ar-e employed are
doing manual, semi--:.ki lled or unskilled labor·.
Summa.r··i
Bi 1 i ngtJa 1 i :.m c·ffer-s sever· a 1 significant 1 i ngu i :.tic
advantages: a) bi 1 ingual -s-emantic processing allow-:.
conceptual flexibility; b)
inflectional morphological
Ll
to syntactic L2 appears easier than vice versa; and
c)
ASL may be lear-ned at least as early and as easily
as Engl i:.h.
Thes.e 1 inguistic &.dvantages ar·e compounded
with additional, perhaps essential, sociocultur-al
r-easons for deaf children to lear-n ASL as a fir-st
language.
According to Paulston (1980);
"Sufficient evidence now exists to argue that
bilingual education is not only appropriate
for deaf children but also that it is the
only educational strategy that makes sense
given the nature of the ethnolinguistic
s i t u &. t i c•n" ( p. 93) .
CHAPTER
l)
ENGLISH AS A SECOND LANGUAGE
The effects of bilingualism are mediated by the
method used to develop second language cc•mpetence.
Accc•r·ding to
Kr·.~s.hen
(1981;:..), bilingual-:. either· "acquir-e"
or "learn" language "simultaneously" or "sequentially",
with sequential acquisition being the most optimal.
The
issue of sequential, as opposed to simultaneous
acquisition, per· tai ns basi ca 11 y to t..,Jhen the second
language is learned.
The issue of acquisition, as
opposed tc• learning, perta.ins basicall::.-· to hovJ the s.ecc•nd
language competence is achieved.
Attitude is examined and found to be a strong
mediating variable to successful
Methods of assisting language
language acquisition.
acquirers~
attitudes are,
therefore, examined.
Simultaneous vs. Sequential
Second Language Acquisition
(4ccording to HaJ<,Jta (1981), chi ldr·en acquir-ing their·
second language at the same time as their- fir-st language
(s.imulta.neous. acquisition) are s.lov.Jer· to learn their· L2,
because they are learning and sorting two separate rule
systems at the same time.
This is why simultaneous
47
bilinguals often display mixed language utterances and
interference between the two language systems
particularly in the initial stages of language
acquisition <Vihman and Mclaughlin 1982).
Sequential second language acquirers, i.e., those
acquiring their l2 after their Ll
thr-c•ugh the
s~.me
is established, go
stage-=· as do ll acquirer·s. but mor·e
quickly, with less stage differentiation.
They often
requir-e as little as one year in order to r-each the
language level of their child peers (Mclaughlin 1978).
This is because the process of transfor-ming surface
phonological str-uctures from underlying meaning only
needs to be gr-asped once <Albert
~
Obler 1978).
In other
words, knowledge of a first language gives sequential
second language acquir-ers cognitive and linguistic
str-ategies to use in acquir-ing their- l2.
Some cognitive str·ategies emplo;.·ed are
over-generalization, simplification, and transfer
<t'1cLatJgh1 in 1978).
Some l ingtJistic s.tra.tegies empl o:r··ed
a.r·e s;.'mbol ic r-epresentation, gr·ammatical and phonol•::.gic.:;..l
str·uct•Jr·e
<Coo~<
1977), and atta.ching inflections. t•::. the
ends of words <Paulston 1980).
Being older- and more
exper-ienced also enables sequential l2 acquirers to
chc•os.e mor·e easi 1 y fr·om among &.1 ter·n.:;..tive memor·y·
str-ategies <Cook 1977).
Further-, older sequential l2
acquirers ar-e able to use their general knowledge about
the world to assist in their l2 acquisition.
That is,
,,
'
48
sequential L2 acquirers take more of an active part in
determining the quality of input they receive <Cook
1977).
Younger children, who do not use these cognitive
and linguistic strategies as well or as often as older
children, more often receive input which is not
sufficiently simplified or roughly tuned <Sarcella
1982).
l<r·a-:.hen <1'7'80) conclude·:. that adolescent
~
Higa
~.nd
adult sequential second language acquirers have more
"aptitude", or "speed", in learning a second language
than do younger simultaneous L1/L2 child acquirers.
Acquisition vs. Learning Language
Krashen (1980) defines acquisition as implicit or
informal learning.
He explains that this is how children
naturally acquire their first language.
r·eqtJir·es. meaningful
inter·action, i.e.,
cc•rmnunica.tion t;,ther·ein
spe~.ker-:.
Acquisition
n~.tur·al
e.re concerned
dth the
l;..
mes.·;;age·:. they are delivering, not the fc•r·m of the
messages (f<rashen 1981a).
According to Krashen (198la)
acquisition, often aided by contextual clues, initiates
utterances and is directly responsible for language
f 1 uenc::-·.
Krashen (1980> defines learning as conscious, formal
knowledge of language.
He emphasizes that the learning
c•f 1 ~.ng•Jage is accc•mpl is.hed thr·ough the use c•f
"monitor", collector, or editor.
l<r-ashen (1'7'80), is.
kno~.-~tir11~
.:r,
Learning, according to
abc•tJt language; it incr-ease•s
"
'
49
gr·amma.tical accura.cy.
C•::.r·r·ecting er·r·ors and tea.ching
language rules, i.e., the traditional formal method of
teaching language, are methods of "learning" language
(Krashen 1981b), as opposed to "acquiring" it.
Krashen
(1981a) defines a "good language learner" as first and
foremost an "acquirer", who may also be a "learner" or
"optimal monitor user".
Learning and Formal Operational Thinking
The "monitor" is that which provides older L2
learners with their "aptitude", or initial "speed", in
learning a L2 <k:r·a.shen 1980).
The a.bility to effecti·. . .·ely
use the monitor is a product of formal operational
thinking (Krashen 1981a), a Piagetian stage of cognitive
development which many people, but not all, reach at
about age eleven.
Therefore, the "learning" of a second
language, i.e., through traditional, formal methods, is
not .:..•._.>a.i 1able tc• chi 1 dren under ten to tv,1el··.Je yea.rs of
age or to adults who have not yet reached formal
opera. t i ona.l
thinking ( Krashen 1 981 a) .
The monitor enables L2 learners to learn and use
abstract rules of grammar to make conscious
generalizations about language.
Monitor users
consciously insert L2 lexicon into Ll surface structure
and use the monitor to add some morphology and repair
word order where the L2 differs from the Ll
1981a).
<Krashen
Thus, the language of good monitor users varies
50
from the child's natural difficulty order <Krashen
( 1 '7'81.::..).
This i-:. because dur·ing editing, attention is
focused on form.
The process of monitoring creates an
overt concern with correct language form and a belief
that unmonitored speech and writing is careless CKrashen
1 $'81 a) .
Krashen (1981a) considers the monitor a difficult
way to learn a L2, because monitor users must:
thinking time, vJhich is
1) have
not available in nc•r·ma1
conversation; 2) be focused on the form of the language,
or correctness; and 3) know the grammatical rules of the
second language.
Monitoring is available mainly in
beginning to learn the written form of the language,
because "it is very difficult to apply conscious learning
to performance successfully" (p. 3).
In con c l us i c•n ,
using the monitor may boost L2 performance in the initial
stages, but it makes only a small contribution to
communicative ability.
This is because monitor users are
·:.everel : .-· 1 imi ted in the r&.nge of -:;.tr·I.JCture-:.
the~l
can
produce (Krashen l'7'81a).
Overuse of the Monitor and Deaf Students
According to Krashen (1981a), overuse of the monitor
is caused by a lack of acquisition.
Language learners
J.,.Jhc• o·-..-·eru-:.e the men i tor· become -:.c. concer·ned J;.Ji th for-m
that they ar-e unwilling to speak because they ar-e afraid
they might make a mistake.
This results in a loss of
51
fluenc:;l.
Deaf students receive formal
fr·om their· fir·-:.t a.r·ri\... a.l
schocd .
instruction in English
in schc•ol unti 1 they• 1 ea.'./e
This forma.l English i ns.tr·t.Jc t ion emph.:..si ze•s
pat ter·n memor· i z-21. t i c•n and cons.c i c•u·:. grammar· ( Le•,_...i ne 1 '7'81) •
But for at least the first five years, these children are
unable to "learn" language because they have not yet
reached formal operational thinking.
Deaf individuals'
English language is characterized by strung together
patterns which have been drilled and memorized in
However, those deaf students
tAtho de• enter fc•r·ma 1 oper·a. t i c•na 1 thinking in the l.s. te
language development years of 10 to 15 are able to use
the monitor to assist their English language development.
These formally operating deaf students may be compared to
L2 ·:. t t.J dent-=·
trained only in foreign language classrooms
where the emphasis is on conscious grammar.
They may develop extensive formal knowledge
of the target language, with very little
acquisition and consequently have no choice
but to be overusers <Krashen 198la, pp. 4-5,
1 6) •
Two important issues in second language
development have been discussed.
Sequential
acquisition appears to facilitate second language
acquisition to a greater degree than simultaneous
acquisition.
In addition, the benefits of the
acquisition of language versus the learning of language
h ao../e been est ab 1 i s.h ed •
Hot,oJever· ,
=· t u die·:.
h a•v•e ·:.h CII.J.Jn
52
less ultimate language attainment by older sequential
L2 acquirers than child L2 acquirers <Mclaughlin 1978 &
l<r.a·:;hen 1980).
This. finding implies that ther·e are
other variables which mediate the effectiveness of
second language acquisition.
Krashen (1981b) claims
that the greater abilities shown by children are
related to attitudinal and motivational factors.
These
factors will be discussed in the following section.
At t i h1di na 1 Influences. on
Second Language Learning Ability
As children reach the cognitive stage of formal
operations, they are better able to conceptualize the
thoughts of others.
This awareness leads to adolescent
egocentrism, increased self-consciousness, feelings of
vulnerability, and lowered self-image <Krashen 198la).
Such affective factors are related to the second
language acquisition process.
These feelings often
discourage L2 acquirers from interacting with more
cc•mpeten t 1 anguage user·s
~·..tho
.are c.apabl e c•f prc•vi ding
cr·i tical pr·imar·y• 1 inguis.tic data..
These atti ttJdinal
and motivational variables strengthen what Krashen
< 1'?81 aJ
ter·ms an
11
affective f i 1 ter 11
•
A high affect i•-..le
filter can prevent acquirers from using all of the
input they hear for further language acquisition
( Kr .as.hen 1 981 a) .
Simply hearing Cor seeing) a second language
with understanding appears to be necessary
but is not sufficient for acquisition to take
53
place. The acquirer must not only understand
the input but must also, in a sense, be
~open'·
tc• it (l<r·a-:.hen 1981a, pp. 21-22).
A high affective filter is related to negative
a.ttittJdes.
tot~Jar·d
c.:..pabi 1 it i es.
c•ne'·s.
•:d;..tn
l.:..ng•Jage le'3.r·ning
It is related to the perceived attitudes
of others toward one's first language and the relative
status of the second language CCokely 1983).
higher the socio-affective filter,
The
the less of the L2
will be acquired, because "less input is allowed in to
the language-acquisition device" (Krashen 1981a, p.
22).
On the other· hand, a l•::.w affecti•v·e filter·, •::.r· .:..
positive attitude toward language learning, allows in
more language input <Krashen 1980).
Thus, second
languages are acquired with varying degrees of success
by adolescents and adults, because they have varying
degrees of affective filters, while children do not.
Children are more focused on communication than form.
They are less influenced by the perceptions of others
and are less self-conscious about errors in their use
c•f 1 an gu a.ge.
In summary, therefore, instead of an optimal age
for L2 acquisition, optimal conditions appear to be
cr·itical.
The-:.e •:onditic•ns '3.r·e r·elated to attittJdin.:..l
and motivational factors which can raise or lower the
affective filter of the language learner.
0
54
Affective Filters and Deaf Students
Self-esteem or self confidence is the most obvious
of the affective factors influencing second language
acquisition.
According to Kr·a·:.hen <1'7'8la), less self
confident individuals have strong affective filters.
On the other hand, self-confident individuals "are more
willing to take risks, to place themselves in
unfamiliar learning situations, to guess or experiment
with new forms, and to make mistakes" <Dulay,
Burt~
Krashen 1982, p. '7'4).
Self-esteem and self confidence are not fostered
in hearing-impaired youths.
Instead, they are looked
down upon as defective and urged to become imperfect
copies of hearing siblings or classmates <Woodward
1975).
This is evidenced in several ways.
Their
language, ASL, is often either completely outlawed or
used in Simultaneous.-Cc•mmunication as simply an•::.ther·
method to aid in learning the English language.
Further, many hearing-impaired children cannot identify
with their hearing parents and do not receive refuge in
their- homes. fr·c•m cul tur·al oppre-:.sion.
This results in
their- for-ming very str-ong ethnic ties in or-der to cope
with, and form an affective filter from, outside
thr-eats against self-concept and identity <Woodward
1'7'75).
Thes-e actic•n-=- are the \lery a.ntithesis to
efficient lang•Ja.ge lear·nin9 beh-:<.vior (Lo•A•e 1981).
Accor·ding to Schumann ( 1975), adCtl e'!:-cent-:. or
'
0
55
adults who filter, or avoid interacting with other
culture/language groups, suffer from identity crises
and become stuck in a spiral which begins with a high
affective filter and l2 difficulties.
They often feel
anxious, not wanting to appear comic in their
communication attempts.
This leads to feelings of
rejection and depression.
They worry over whether they
are saying what they mean to say.
These l2
difficulties often spiral down into a stronger
affective filter.
These individuals then reject
themselves and/or their culture.
In a further downward
tur·n c•f thi-:. -:.pir.s.l, the·:.e individual-:. cc•n·sider·
themselves incapable of living in a foreign culture and
of learning a foreign language.
These individuals may
also blame or reject the second language people and
their c•J l ture ( Schum.;:,.nn l 975) .
On the other hand, when individuals acquiring a l2
begin with a low affective filter and l2 difficulties,
their attitude and motivation aids them in learning the
l2.
This begins their spiral up because it aids in
learning the culture.
learning the l2 culture aids in
1 ear-ning mor·e •::.f the l2 ( S•:humann 1 975) .
Fostering A low Affective Filter
Miller and Bentley (1970) consider education a
"crucial deter-mining variable" in deaf people's lives
(p. 24).
They believe attitudes must be changed in
'
56
educ.~. t
ion befc•r·e change can be expected any•t. .Jher· e else.
Negative attitudes of individuals, the deaf included,
reflect the negative attitudes of their environment,
their parents, their teachers, and society in general
toward differences.
Conversely, positive attitudes are just as
"catching".
Purkey (1977> found that calm, supportive,
facilitative teachers added to students' self-concepts.
Hosford (1980) found that effective teachers differ
mainly in the "silent", or affective,
c~rriculum.
Effective teachers' styles, or how they do what they
do, are calm, accepting, and supportive.
Yet, they
also spend more time on task-related academic
activities.
Teachers of the deaf could then expect
their deaf students' English acquisition to correspond
roughly with their own abilities to enhance their
students' self-concepts.
Deaf adolescents'
self-concepts may be fostered by acceptance of their
language, ASL, and their culture <Padden 1980; Stevens
1 980; Sc h 1 e·:. in ger
2:.:: t1e.~.dc•t;.J
1 972; Tr· ybu -=;. 1 980; a.n d
V.loodv-tar d 1 975) .
Summarx
This chapter examined simultaneous and sequential
L2 acquisition and noted that sequential L2 acquirers
have both cognitive and linguistic advantages.
Language acquisition, as opposed to language learning
57
with the monitor, was examined.
Acquisition was
determined to be superior, since learning merely
increases grammatical accuracy while acquisition
initiates utterances and sustains fluency.
monitoring was shown to be an additional
advantage with written material.
Prudent
initial
However, learning
with the monitor without acquisition results in
di sf 1 uenq.·•
The effect that attitude and the related degree of
affective filter has on second language acquisition was
examined.
Ways of overcoming high affective filters
were discussed, and related features of effective L2
teachers were described.
In the fell
Ol;_ti
ng chapter·,
methods of pr•:.viding appr·opr·iate input in an
en·-..dronment which fc•ster·-:. a lc•t.•J affecti•v•e fi 1 ter· v..ti 11
be di scu-:.sed.
CHAPTER
~.)I
PROVIDING LANGUAGE ACQUISITION,
NOT LEARNING - OR Hm·.P
This. chapter· f i rs.t review-::. the option-::. a\;ai 1 able for·
the acquisition of ASL as a first language.
VJ
Deaf adults
i t h i n the Deaf c omrn u n i t y a r e seen a·:. t h e be=· t , i f no t
the only, avenue ctJr·rently available for· the acquisition
of ASL as aLl.
It is suggested that this task be
undertaken within an otherwise "normal" preschool
setting.
This chapter then examines the conflicting
advice par·ents. of "handicapped" chi 1 dren receive fr-om the
"exper-ts" and these parents' emotions as reasons why
ther-e is such a time gap between identification of deaf
children's hearing losses and their entry into school.
Parent groups organized by teachers is offered as one
solution to this problem.
This chapter then discusses Pidgin Sign English
<PSE) as appropriate L2 input.
PSE is determined to be
both teacher talk or foreigner talk, depending upon the
competency of the speaker.
PSE i-:. found to be
As a teacher- talk register,
•;~r-a.rnma.tic.:d
1 ;.-· a.cctJrate, -::.impl ified,
appropriate input for- English as a Second Language <ESL)
acquisition for deaf ASL users.
The most productive methods of acquiring a L2 are
58
59
then ex ami ned a.nd deter-mi ne·d to be the ':-ame a·:. thos.e for·
a.cq,Jir-ing aLl.
Thi':- begins. V.Jith an initial ':-ilent
per· i od and mode 1 i n g, f o 1 1 01.Ned by communi cat i on , .;;.. s
defined by Kr-ashen (1981a).
A gener-al hier-ar-chial or-der-
of the acquisition of ESL is then pr-esented to assist
teacher-s in pr-esenting r-oughly tuned PSE.
Acquisition of Amer-ican Sign Language
as a Fir-st Language - How and Wher-e?
In-the-home natur-al
language acquisition for deaf
chi 1 dr·en fr·om their· pa.r·ents is not an option.
t·-1c•re than
ninety percent of deaf children come from hearing par-ents
who do not know any signs at the time they are first told
their· childr-en ar-e deaf <t'h:tc•r·es 1'7'87).
At ti-d·:. point in
time, the schools ar-e also incapable of pr-oviding ASL as
aLl
to deaf children.
Teachers of deaf childr-en ar-e
r·epor-ted to fr·eq1Jently ha'-le
childr-en <Maxwell 1985b).
difficult~..'
under-':.tanding deaf
Ther-efor-e, the r-emaining
a,._,·enue fc•r- deaf children to acquir-e• ASL as. aLl
i·:. to
utilize a r-esource her-etofore within the liter-ature only
hinted at -deaf adults within the Deaf community
<t-1.::..xwell
1 985b) •
~'H
th fei;.J exceptions, on 1 :l they ar·e
cc•mpetent enC•IJgh in ASL to be able tc• pr·o'-lide .::.. c.:ar·eta.ker·
for-m of ASL <Cokely 1983 & Maxwell 1985b).
Amer-ican Sign Language Acquisition in the Home
One of the complaints often hear-d is that "hearing
loss is cur-rently seldom detected and quantitatively
60
assessed in the infant's first year - often not until
much later" (Moores 1980, p. 1) and that deaf children
often enter school at the age of 5 or 6 with little or no
language at all.
However, Dr. Morgan (1982), Associate
Professor of Surgery and Director of the Audiology Clinic
at UCLA, believes the need is no longer in identifying
hearing lc. ss in ear·ly infanq.·· but in follov.Jing up v.Jith
the parents of infants who were identified to have
hearing losses.
There appears to be a large time gap
between when hearing losses are initially identified and
when children are placed in school.
Maxwell
(1985a)
advises researchers to spend less time on "what parents
'ought to do' with their children" and more time on "what
pa.rents de• and v..thy they do or do not fo11•:.vJ a.d-v·ice from
the
profe~.sionals"
(p. 102).
Conflicting Advice from the Experts
many people involved with deaf children.
-There are
I n add i t i on t c•
parents, this list includes special education and regular
education teachers, vocational and physical education
teachers, speech pathologists, audiologists,
psychologists, counselors, and medical doctors.
These
people all bring their own expertise to the situation and
very often have conflicting opinions and advice for the
parents <Maxwell 1985a).
The question of sign language
a.nd/or or· a 1 1 anguage devel c•pmen t
tc•pi c.
is;. a high 1 y emc•t i c•na 1
61
Parents of "handicapped" children go through the
same hierarchial emotional stages that a person dealing
~'Jith
a dea.th faces:
conft_;sion, deni.:..i, .3.nger·-9uilt,
hope, depression, and then acceptance.
These parents
face a death, too- the death of a dream of a "normal"
child <Rudman 1975).
U-:.ua.lly ther·e ar·e no pr·ofe·:.sionals
available to help these parents throu9h their 9rief
n'loor·es 1 9:37) .
In the first sta9e, "confusion", parents often
initially feel helpless, stupid, and confused because
they have received insufficient and confiictin9
information (8u-:.ca9l ia 1 '7'81).
"denial".
The second s.ta.9e is
Often when the facts are stated clearly "they
are so shocking to the parents that they are actually not
heard or are conveniently misunderstood" C8usca9lia 1981,
p. 283).
In the third sta9e, "an9er-9uilt", parents
c•f ten bl arne the pr·c•fe-:.si c•na 1 s mak i n9 the· di ·9.9rP::.si s
<Sitnick, Rushmer
inward.
~
Arpan 1977).
Guilt is an9er turned
Parents in this sta9e benefit 9reatly from open,
honest parent 9roup discussions CWilders
The fourth sta9e is "hope".
~Robson
1980).
In our "disease"-oriented
-:.ociety toward differ·ences, par-ent:. a.sstJme that deafnes.s
is not permanent - that it can be treated (Moores 1987).
Unfortunately, many of these par-ents are led by the
"experts" to believe that the deafne-:.s i-:. indeed
"temporary", that a miracle cure is forthcoming, and that
proper education can make their- child "normal" CSitnick,
0 •
~1
62
Rushmer
~
Arpan 1977).
In the fifth stage, "depression",
parents·' emotion-=· r-a.nge fr·om the "blues" to wi thdr·a'A'-:..1
with attempts to hide the child.
Depression does,
hov,,ever, indica. te that the "di a.gn•::.si '=· of abnorma.l i ty" has
been accepted (Sitnick, Rushmer
~
Arpan 1977).
The last
stage, "acceptance", marks the beginning of when the
parents accept their children for what they are children fir-st, and "handicapped" second.
Parents at
this stage are aware of the normal areas as well as the
"abnormal" areas.
<Sitnick, Rushmer
A r-elaxed attitude predominates
~
Arpan 1977).
Stewar-t (1983)
consider-s parents' acceptance of their- child's "handicap"
critical
tc• the de··-1el c•pment of deaf chi 1 dren.
He adds
that for some this may mean using sign language.
The rate at which parents proceed thr-ough these
stages ...,..ar·ies grea.tl::l.
Sc•me pa.r·ents are -:.ti 11 "r·eel
in•;~
from the blow" of having a "handicapped" child when theirchi 1 d r· each es ado l e':!:.c en c e (Evan-=· 1 980
Parent Education
~
R1J dman 1 '7'75) •
-There are very few articles
,_._,ri tten for· par·ents about '-'Jhat tc• expect from inter·viev.Js
or confer-ences with teacher-s or doctors <Buscaglia 1981).
Buscaglia (1981) believes parents often leave conferences
with these professionals knowing no more than when they
c.:..me in.
Accor·ding tc• Sitnick, Rushmer-
~"'-
Ar-pa.n (1'7'77), the
initial meeting with par-ents is the most cr-itical
It is
'
63
at this time when physicians and parents begin behaving
differ·entl:>-' towa.r-d "ha.ndic.:..pped" chi ldr·en (Connc•r· 1'?81).
Many Downs Syndrome par-ents r-eceive vital suppor-t at this
most cr·itica.l
time.
D•::.t..,m-:. S::.-·ndr·•::.me par·ent 9r-•::.up-:. have
organized to pr-ovide par-ent volunteer-s to be pr-esent when
par-ents ar-e initially infor-med that their- child is
"h.:..ndicapped" (Connc•r· 1'7'81).
Family equilibr-ium cannot be maintained or
r·ei nsta. ted in a va.cutJm 0'1oc•r·e-:. 1987) •
Teacher·s c•f the:·
deaf can help by or-9anizing the parents of theirstudents.
They can hold monthly or- bimonthly par-ent
meetings.
It has been shown that par-ents who attend
par-ent groups feel
less isolated and ar-e better able to
distinguish between the normal problems of childhood and
those br-ought on by deafness <Tucker- 1978).
Eighty-five
per-cent of 600 par-ents at a 6-day par-ent education
seminar answer-ed that the one most valuable thing they
lear-ned was that ther-e wer-e so many other par-ents like
themselves with "handicapped" childr-en <Buscaglia 1981).
Par·ent·:. have often been nc•ted either· to
re~iect
signing as a means of communication or- to discontinue its
use ar·ound gr-andparents even tho•Jgh commtJn i cation
suffers.
Moores <1987), therefor-e, str-esses the need for
grandpar-ents to be invited and encouraged to attend gr-oup
meetings involving the adjustment to a deaf child in the
family.
Moores (1987) notes that in times of stress
families refer more often to the
64
vertical kinship network of three generations
(child-parent-grandparent) rather than to the
horizontal network of siblings and cousins,
the network of friends and neighbors, or
helping &.gencies Cpp. 1:::5-6).
Sitnick, Rushmer
~
Arpan (1977)
emphasize that
professionals dealing with parents should be open,
honest, and realistic in answering parents' questions.
Beale~
Beers (1982)
offer a test for
if their responses to parents are:
teachers to see
1) the
commander-in-chief type, relying upon authority, duty,
or obligation and "having already decided what parents
involvement and denying the strength of the parents'
feelings; 3)
the probing interrogator type, with a
"question/answer pattern of interaction which impedes
spontaneous discussions"; or 4)
facilitator
the understanding
type, who accepts parents' feelings and
their right to express their feelings and beliefs
honestly without fear of disapproval
(p. 37).
P&.r·en t group:. a.l :.o ser···,-'e tc• provide the
information parents so desperately crave after
initially accepting their children's "handicap".
An
excellent source of information is Impact-HI, c/o 11089
Viacha Drive, San Diego, California
bimonthly publication,
92124.
It has a
the "Endeavor", conventions,
position papers, and a resource library.
Another
excellent source of information is the Greater Los
65
Angeles Association for the Deaf (GLAD> at 616 South
Westmoreland Avenue, Los Angeles, California
21 :=:-780-2200.
90005,
It has a directory which contains among
other things parent-child agencies, audiological,
medical, and religious services, entertainment, and
recrea t i c•n.
It also lists exceptional publications.
Parents are traditionally the movers and the doers
for the "handicapped" <Buscaglia 1981).
Parent groups
can serve to organize parents, wherein their anger can
be channeled into effective action <Buscaglia 1981).
The medical profession in general
is poorly informed
regarding the implications of hearing loss.
Sma 11
parent groups could begin by informing hospitals and
the medical profession in general
that they are
a:·.Jai 1 able tc• be present to pro•v•i de i nfc•rma t ion a.nd
emotional support when hearing parents are initially
informed that their child is hearing-impaired.
Parents
need to hear that their natural parenting skills are
good and necessary and that they can learn the
additional skills they need <Sitnick, Rushmer
1977).
~
Arpan
Buscaglia (1981) believes this support could
mean the difference between hope and dispair.
This
support would help to move parents faster through their
emot i c•na 1 -:;.ta.ges t•::.v,•ar·d
for what they are.
a.ccept.~nce
of their· chi 1 dren
Beale and Beers (1982) emphasize
that under·-:.tanding i-:. cr·itica.l
through these emotional stages.
to he•lping par·ent-:.
And who can provide
66
this understanding better than parents who have been
there thems.el ves?
American Sign Language in the Schools
According to Maxwell
(1985a), schools report using
"signs" to improve understanding, because deaf
chi 1 dren ·' -=· s.peech is sc• "r·.:..r·el7· in tell i gi bl e" ( p. 173) •
Teachers of the deaf commonly rely upon other students,
aides, or other teachers to communicate with their
students and to explain lessons <Maxwell
1985a).
This
inability to communicate leads these teachers to rely
upon a didactic teaching model which allows them to
lecture and avoid interaction.
Yet, thinking skills
have long been shown to be a direct result of the
"questions used in a teaching strategy" <Cunningham,
1971, p. 85).
Woodward and Allen (1987) document
schools' communication policies as reported by
teachers' descriptions to be very confusing about the
use of ASL, English, and total communication CTC).
The use of ASL in the schools has been reported to
have increa·::.ed o•,ler· the pa.st fev.J :;..>ear·::. a.s .a result of
ASL research which began in 1960 by William Stokoe.
But
~'Joodwar
d
:~
A1 1 en's ( 1 987) s.u r·v•ey s.h ot;.Js that ac b.J a 1
ASL use is much less than its reported use.
They
surveyed 1,888 teachers of 4,500 randomly selected deaf
students.
One hundred and forty of these teachers said
they used ASL in the classroom.
But a series of
67
be•havic•r·-oriented question-:. that
indir·ectl~l
asse-:.'E.ed
ASL competency "·:.t.Jcce·::.sivel /' r·e·duce•d thi-=· number to 25
teachers who may be using ASL in the classroom and to 6
who prc•babl!·' ar·e"
(~··loodl..\!a.r·d ~
All en 1987, p. 1) •
These
figures are not at all surprising when we recognize
that most teachers of the deaf are hearing English
spea~<er·s
t;..~ho:
1) learned sign after their education
studies; 2> are employed in pr·eschool and
elementar~.'
schools on separate locations from high schools where
almost half of the deaf teachers are employed; 3> do
not generally have contact with hearing or deaf
signers; and 4) do not generally remain in the
classroom very long <Maxwell
1985b).
Teacher Preparation in American Sign Language
Fifty-four percent of the 85 responding teachers
in Maxwell's C1985b) survey agreed that teachers of the
deaf shou 1 d 1 ear·n ASL.
Hov.Je'·.Jer·, ASL is gener·a 11 ~.,· given
a ver·y low pr·ior·ity ¢\.nd status on teacher· pr·epar·ation
campu·:.e·::. (t'1axv..te11 1985a.) .
The-:.e campuses offer a.-:.
little .::..s one c•r no "sign" cla-:.·:.e-:.•
t·'h.xt.Mell
C1985b)
contrasts this to the minimum foreign language
r·equir·ement c•n m.::..ny ca.mpt.Jses c•f four· full semester·s of
four to five unit classes of "exposure to a foreign
language Cthat students are not really expected to ever
use>" (p. 177).
Maxwell's (1985b> report also shows
that the population in large ASL classes is made up
68
mostly of other than teachers of the deaf.
She r· epc•r· t -:.
there is no standard or consistency in ASL classes
within teacher education programs nationwide.
Maxwell
(1985b) blames the lack of clarity as to the kinds of
signs that are taught in teacher education colleges on
the confusion of signs in classes and programs for deaf
children.
After all, she says, the teachers in these
schools graduated from these teacher preparation
programs.
According to Maxwell (1985b), signing
practices and proficiencies not only vary from school
to school but from teacher to teacher within schools,
with :.orne "te.:o.cher·:. making up signs t-\lhen the;.' ha··-/e .:.,
le:•dcal gap in their· knm,..Jledge" <p. 175).
More and better ASL classes for teachers and
parents, therefore, "appear even more important than at
first glance" <Maxwell 1985b, p. 1974).
Teacher
education colleges clearly have a difficult task ahead
c•f them.
"Total communication teachers especially
should attain a certain level of bilingual competence
before certification is granted" <Stewart, 1983, p.
163) .
It i:. hoped that better· comm1.mic.:o.tic•n
about by ASL competency will
br-c•U•~ht
influence teacher-s to stay
in the cla·:.s.r-oc•m lc•nger·.
Amer-ican Sign Language: First Language
Acquisition in the Pr-eschool
The over-all opinion of teacher-s of the deaf in
Stewar-t's (1983) survey was that "deaf children should
0
69
begin signing at a-:. ear·ly .:r.n .:r.ge a-=:. pc•-=:.-:;.ible" <p. 145).
However, these teachers felt that the sign system
should be Sign English but that deaf children should
event u a 1 1 ::-· bee orne b i 1 in gu a 1 •
t·,1a.::-::t..ve l 1 ( 1 '7'85a.) pc• in t s
out that these professionals gained their expertise in
hearing graduate school classrooms, testing booths, and
therapy rooms.
Maxwell (1985a) points out that the
great majority of professionals in deaf education have
had little contact with Deaf adults outside of their
professional duties.
Jacobs (1974) adds that he has
rarely seen these professionals at Deaf social
gatherings.
Maxwell (1985a, 1985b) contends,
therefore, that these professionals' views of deafness
and the needs of the deaf rarely reflect the Deaf
communities' opinions.
Rather these professionals'
opinions "ar·e based on their ovm intuition-=:..and va 1 ue-=:.
which are acquired in courses in 'the hearing world'"
<Maxwell 1985b, p. 99).
Teachers must first understand and accept their
own fears, prejudices, and attitudes before they work
t;.Jith the "handicapped"
<Bus.ca·~lia
1981).
not, Buscaglia (1981) contends that these professionals
r i s.k judging and imposing their· mAJn ·::.t.:r.nda.r·d-s:. UJ:u:m the
"handicapped" and their parents.
Buscaglia <1981)
wisely states that "one can only give to his child, or
anyone else, what he himself has and knows" (p. 90).
Who knows ASL and its culture better than the Deaf
'
70
t h ems.e 1•v•es.?
Stewart (1983) argues that in order for ASL to
become an integral part of teaching methodology in the
education of the deaf, the Deaf themselves must assume
d i r· ec t i nv•c•l vemen t i n i t -=· i n t egr at i c•n •
S t ewar· t <1 983)
also contends that the Deaf community strongly support
this involvement.
Neglecting deaf people's abilities thus far has
"probably cost educators valuable tools for meeting the
needs of deaf children" <Maxwell 1985a, p. 100).
Preschools for deaf children run and staffed by the
Deaf would provide a superior environment for the
acquisition of ASL as a Ll.
This option also quite
probably is more financially feasible than current
preschool educational settings for the deaf.
Preschools for hearing English children have much less
rigorous educational requirements for the staff than
those required for educating first grade and beyond.
Preschools for the deaf should not need any more
stringent requirements than preschools for hearing
children.
per day•.
Preschools generally run three to four hours
This t1JC•U 1 d 1 eave p 1 en t ::-· of time f c•r the
standard itinerant in-the-home or even in-the-preschool
oral/aural stimulation and training.
It is clear that a "major reorganization of
education of the deaf to 'Deafness'" is in order
( t·1.e•.XVJe 1 1 1 985a.) •
Instead of deaf teachers teaching
71
high school
<Woodward~
Allen 1987), they should be
encouraged to teach elementary and preschool.
Acquisition of English- How?
The establishment of preschools run by the Deaf
communit::i prc•\ddes an avenue tc• the a.cqui·::.ition of ASL
a Second Language accomplished?
L2 acquisition is like
Ll acquisition in that it requires language input which
is just a little bit above the language acquirer's
current level
i;Kr·ashen l981a).
In other words, L2
acquirers require a type of caretaker input.
Krashen
(198la) believes "simplified registers" provide this
kind of appropriate input for L2 acquirers.
Pidgin Sign English as a Simplified
Register for Second Language Acquisition
According to
Cov~el:;'
<1983), Pidgin Sign Engl i-::.h is.
not a pidgin, because it does not meet any of the
preconditions necessary for the development of a
pidgin.
First, Cokely (1983) explains, pidgins display
assymetr· i ca 1 dc•mi nan t 1 anguage spr·ea.d unrec i proca ted b)-·'
a spread of the subordinate language.
However, ASL is
becoming widely recognized and accepted.
Secondly,
pidgins have a restricted domain of interaction.
However, the deaf and hearing make contact in almost
all areas of society.
And, finally, the emerging
1 a.nguage •v•ariet::o· (the pidgin)
i·:. recognized .;..s a
72
separate system.
Whereas, it has only been since 1970
that the hearing community has recognized ASL as
anything other than poor English.
I t h ~. -;:. been even
fewer years since it has been differentiated from PSE.
Mcintire (1980) add that PSE "has access to a
Reilly~
wider range of grammatical constructions than do most
pidgin-:." ( p. 1 52) .
Accc•rdi ng to
Co~·::el ~-'
( 1 983) , PSE
does not characterize bilingualism either, since "this
would necessitate some level of functional,
conversational proficiency in ASL and in spoken
Eng 1 ish" ( p. 8) •
Instead, Cokely (1983) defines PSE as a simplified
register.
"Simplified registers" are specialized,
simplified codes used in particular situations <Cokely
1 983) •
Co~<el ~-'
( 1 983) and Cc•r·der· ( 1 981) agree in their
analysis of simplified registers in all but
terminology.
Cokely's (1983) definition of learner's
grammars <"imperfect approximations of the target
language" (p. 3)) corresponds to Corder's (1981)
definition of foreigner talk (the talk of foreignersor persons learning a language).
The emphasis here is
that the language user is in the process of learning
language.
Cokely's definition of foreigner talk ("the
variety of language regarded by the community as
appropriate for addressing foreigners or outsiders" (p.
10)) , 1 i ~·~e'"''i ·:.e cor·r·espond:. to Cor·der ,. s definition of
teacher talk (a selection by speakers from the total
73
r·eper·toire of fc•rms
a.\.l.:d
l.::..bl e in the gr·amma.r· c•f their·
language used to teach language to "foreigners").
The
emphasis here is that the language user knows and is
teaching language.
PSE is both teacher talk and foreigner talk <using
Corder's terminology>.
As a foreigner talk register,
it is the ASL that English speakers are learning or the
English that ASL speakers are learning.
As a teacher
talk register, it is the English that bilingual
ASL/English speakers are using for the purpose of
teaching.
According to Corder (1981), some simplified
registers, that is, pidgins, foreigner talk, and baby
talk, are structurally simple and ungrammatical.
These
simplified registers are not appropriate input for L2
acquir·er·-=:. <Corder 1981).
Corder ( 1981) argue-::. th.at
people cannot simplify what they do not already
On the other hand, teacher talk is a simplified
register which Corder (1981) and Krashen Cl98la)
believe to be appropriate input for L2 acquirers.
Users of teacher talk and caretaker forms select from
the total repertoire of forms available in the grammar
of their language, a more complex register.
Teacher
talk and caretaker forms are tuned to about the same
degree.
They are both simpler than native speaker -
native speaker talk.
And they are both marked and
74
simplified, i.e., the communicators are able to, and do
in other situations, use a fully complex adult
grammatical register, or language <Krashen 198la)
Certain forms and structures may be less
frequent or completely absent in a simple
register. This, however, does not mean that
the code (language) is being simplified, only•
that the use is being simplified <Corder
1981, p. 147).
PSE is often represented as a two-dimensional
continuum with ASL on one side and English on the other
(Reilly~
Mcintire 1980).
PSE varies along this
continuum as foreigner talk or teacher talk according
to the speakers' "own personal
<Reilly~
linguistic capabilities"
Mcintire 1980, p. 153).
PSE also varies
along this continuum as the teacher talk register of a
fluent ASL/English bilingual as a function of the
perceived linguistic needs and competencies of the
rec•:iver· c•f the utterance-:. <Cokel:;' 1983).
Thu·:.,
teacher talk, like caretaker talk, progresses in
difficulty as the L2 acquirer's language progresses.
Thus, PSE as a simplified register of a fluent
bilingual may be used to teach ESL to ASL Ll students.
The foll c•win9 -:.ection v.Ji 11 examine ESL techniques.
English as a Second Language Technique
The most productive methods of teaching/acquiring
a L2 have turned out to be the same methods by which a
L 1 is
~.c
qui r· ed:
.:..n in i t i a 1 s i 1 en t per· i c•d, mode 1 in g
75
<with contextual clues), and a focus on communication,
not form.
Initia.l Silent <f':eceptive Onh··> Per·iod
Realizing that
children~s
language acquisition is often
intrinsically tied to physical response <Mclaughlin,
1978), Asher and Price devised the Total Physical
Response CTPR) method of initiating language
acquisition.
This method begins with approximately ten
hours of receptive only experiences.
During this time
the students copy what the teacher says and does.
teacher begins
and "Stand up".
~~..ti
The
th -::.impl e ·:.entences 1 ike "Sit dovm"
She progressively drops teacher
mc•del i ng a.nd adds mor-e cc•mpl ex :.en tences 1 i ~{e "If Abner
runs to the chalkboard, run after him and tap him with
yc•tJr- penc i 1" ( Du 1 a~.', Bur· t
:!...:
Kra:.hen 1 982) •
:3tuden t-::.
with 32 hours of this TPR method perfor-med as well
in
reading and writing and better- in listening
cc•mpr·ehension than control·:. with 150 hour·:. in an
audiolingual method of memorization, drills, and
successive appr-oximations <Dulay, Burt fu Krashen 1982>.
A modification of the Total Physical Response
method may be even more effective and more useful with
1 ar ge c 1 a -:;.se·:.•
Second, fourth, and eighth gr-aders, who
acted only when tested, unexpectedly tested slightly
higher than those who imitated the adult model
times in random sequence.
ten
Kr·a:.hen ( 1 '7'80) believe-::. TPR
0 .
76
owes its success more to students' "attending to and
understanding the message", rather than to "its
physical aspect •••.
tal~{,
Since they are not required to
mo-=-t c•f the time i":. filled v.Jith cmnpr·ehensible
input" (p. 25).
Gary (1978) suggests language students
not be required to express their L2, other than by
pointing, nodding, or checking a worksheet or picture,
for three months or more.
He believes much more of the
target language can be acquired in less time if
students are not required to expend the additional
considerable effort required to retrieve it.
Krashen
( 1 '7'81 a) r·ecommend':. L2 phys-i ca 1 r·espon-:.e":. be tJ":.ed on 1 ~-·
as checks on comprehension.
This would serve to keep
teachers' language levels roughly tuned to their
students' language levels.
Communication - Dulay, Burt
~
Krashen (1982)
remind us that "we teach language best when we use it
for· t_...tha.t it
t.~-tas
de-=-igned fc•r:
communica.tic•n" <p. 26.!:.).
Krashen (198la) reminds us that simplified registers
ar·e generall::l fc•und in L2 cla-=-sroc•m·:. in vJhich
cc•mmun i cation, i n':.tead of fc•rm, is c•f pr· ima.r·y•
importance.
He cautions that attention to form
heightens affective filters, thus inhibiting language
progress.
Krashen <1981a) advises language teachers to
use a natural
language approach, rather than mechanical
drills, to use contextual clues, to involve students
77
directly, and to respond to content, not form.
He also
suggests teachers speak in a teacher talk register of
the l2 but allow students to speak in either the ll
the l2.
or
He recommends teachers ask real, not
contrived, questions.
He suggests teachers ignore
students' errors, unless communication fails.
He
suggests grammar be corrected through homework
assignments.
Krashen (1981a)
teaching, as peers'
language levels are often roughly
tuned to 'a little better'
language levels.
teacher··:.
~.hou1
Dulay,
than other students'
Burt~
Krashen (1982)
add that
d nc•t requir·e more from a student th.an a
native speaker.
That is,
normally elicit a full
speaker,
also suggests using peer
if the question would not
sentence answer from a native
the teacher should not require the student to
answer with a full
sentence.
English as a Second language Sequential
Acquisition of Morphemes and Syntax -Second language
structures are acquired in a specific order, regardless
of age <Fathman 1974
~Mclaughlin
1978), ll, or the
order in which structures are presented in the
clas-:.r·c•c•rn <Kra.-::.hen 1980).
This or·der· is
both speaking and writing <Dulay, Burt
Dulay, Burt
~
Krashen (1982)
~
rn.~.intained
in
Krashen 1982).
suggest that ESl teachers
become aware of the order in which their l2 students
will
acquire English structures.
This is not so they
78
may formally teach to that order, but so that they will
understand their L2 students' learning patterns, have a
more accurate picture of each students' current
acquisition level, and be able to present a roughly
tuned simplified register.
Second language strategies for dealing with
irregularities, e.g., past tense and inflections, are
simi 1 ar in a 11 second 1 -3-nguage-:. 0•1cLaugh 1 in 1 978) .
The
irregular past tense, the article, the copula, and the
auxiliary show the greatest amount of difference
between Ll and L2 acquisition, in that except for the
irregular past tense, their acquisition is in the early
stages of acquiring a L2.
These structures are
considered more difficult for Ll acquirers as they come
in the later stages of their Ll acquisition (Dulay,
Burt
~
Krashen 1982).
In other words, difficult
-;:.tr,Jctur·es, including functor·s
(Ccao~{
1977), .appear to
be compar·ati•v•ely easier· tea learn fear ·:.equential L2
acquirers.
This is probably due to the sequential L2
acquirer-=--· ability to IJSe pr·e'v'iOIJSly• acquir·ed cogniti•./e
and linguistic strategies.
Second languages are best acquired in much the
-:.arne way a-:. first 1 a.ng•Ja.a;;~e·:., •Ali th an ini tia.1 si 1 ent
per·icad and a. focu·:. on ca::ammunicatican •Js:.ing a s:.impl ified
register.
Perfecting these techniques:. may s:.ave
valuable time and minimize losses:. measured in human
potent i a.l •
79
Summar- .,..
This chapter examined ASL Ll acquisition options,
opting for- Deaf adult inter-vention.
PSE was then
discussed as both for-eigner- or- teacher- talk r-egister-s,
depending upon the language pr-oficiency of the speaker-.
Gr-ammo.tic.:..lly cc•r-r·ect PSE, i.e., a teacher· talk
r-egister- of PSE, was deter-mined to be essential
to ESL
acquisition for- ASL Ll students.
t'1•?thods. of teaching a L2 ,_._,er-e exo.mi ned.
An
initial silent per-iod, modeling, and a focus on
communic.:..tic•n wer-e .judged to be most pr-oducti•v•e.
A
gener-al hier-ar-chy of acquisition of ESL mor-phemes was
then pr-esented, so that teacher-s may know their
students' cur-r-ent approximate L2 acquisition levels and
be better- able to pr-esent a r-oughly tuned simplified
r-egister.
Sllt'11'"1ARY
The
lad~
of or·a.l cc•mmunica.tion -3.nd l iteraq.·
~-kills
in the English language is a major economic stumbling
block of deaf adults.
This paper, therefore, examined
ways to develop competency in the English language.
competency is dependent upon several
This
things.
The normal development of syntax and morphology is
dependent upon sufficient phonological short-term memory
during brain plasticity.
The gestalt and analytical
language learning modes were examined and their
cooperation was shown to be essential but not sufficient
tc• competent and cc•rnplete language develc•prnent.
Appropr·ia.te input i:. also requir·ed fc•r· complete .:..nd
competent language development.
Krashen's C1981a)
definition of essential appropriate input to language
development vJa-:. exa.mined a.nd applied a·:. a ya.rd·:.tid< v.Jith
which to measure MCE and ASL.
areas of appropriate input.
MCE failed in two of three
This also caused MCE to fail
as gestalt and analytical perception.
On the other hand,
ASL provides appropriate input as well
as gestalt and
analytical perception.
Bi 1 ingua.l is.m
•.~-•a·:.
examined a:. an a. . . . enue to pr·c•viding
deaf children with English language competence.
80
81
ASL.l"Engl i<.:.h bi 1 ingu.:~l ism
v.Ja<.:. deter-mined to c•ffer· thr-ee
sign if i ca.n t 1 i ngu i -:.tic ado·...'an ta.ges: 1) bi 1 i ngua l sem.an tic
pr-ocessing which foster-s conceptual flexibility; 2)
inflectional mor-phological Ll
to syntactic L2 appear-s
easier- than vice ver-sa; and 3) ASL may be learned at
least as ear-ly as English.
Additionally, a sociocultur-al
advantage was pr-esented as crucial
to good self-esteem
and self-actualization.
Simultaneous versus sequential acquisition was
examined.
Sequential acquisition of a L2 by ten to
twelve year olds was deter-mined to be the most
advantageous.
Natural
language "acquisition" was then
compar-ed and -:.een as -:.uper· i or- to the c l
language "lear-ning".
a.-:.sr·oc•m-t~lpe
Attitude and its related degr-ee of
affective filter· v.Ja-:. then ex ami ned and seen a-:. a. l irni t i fP;i
factor- in learning second languages.
Factor-s influencing
attitude v..ter-e ex.amined as IJJ•?ll .a:. 1;..1.ay·;. of 1 ower·ing their·
r-elated affective filter-s.
Sever·al pr·oblem-:. wer·e discussed in .acquir-ing ASL as
aLl and ESL.
.:~venue
Deaf adults wer-e deter-mined to be the best
tc• .acquir·ing ASL a.-:. a Ll.
PSE v,1.as then examined
and deter-mined to be appropr-iate input for- ESL when
presented by ASL/English bilinguals.
In conclusion, it was pr-oposed that deaf children
are able to develop English language competence best by
becoming ASL Ll/ESL bilinguals.
ASL is best lear-ned fr-om
Deaf adults in a preschool setting and car-r-ied over to
82
the elementary school.
these ASL Ll
ESL is then best presented after
deaf children reach ten to fifteen years of
age through PSE by a competent ASL/English bilingual.
(l
LIST OF REFERENCES
A1 ber· t , Ma.r- tin L. &: Ob 1 er· , Lor- a in e K. ( 1 978) • The
bilingual br-ain: Neuropsychological and
neur-olinguistic aspects of bilingualism. New Yor-k:
Academic Pr·e-:.·:.•
Ar-mstr-ong David F. (1983). Income and occupations of
deaf for-mer college students. Jour-nal of
Rehabi 1 ita. t i •XI of the Deaf, 17: 1, 8-15.
Ar-mstr·ong, David F. ( 1 985) • ~-·H 1 l it e•ver·? Si qn
Lang1..1a.qe Studies, 48, 22:3-248.
B.:..!<er-, Char·l otte ~~ C·=·~<el y, Denni·:. ( 1980). Amer·ican ·:.ign
language: A teacher-~s resour-ce text on language and
cultur-e. Silver- Spr-ings, Mar-yland: T. J. Publisher-s,
Inc.
Ba.tti·:.c•n, Rc•bin (iS?8). Lexical b•:.r·r·m,,,ing in American
sign language. Silver- Spr-ings, Mar-yland: Linstock
Pr-ess.
Beale, Andrew&: Beers, Car-ol S. (1982). What do you say
to parents after you say hello? Teachinq Exceptional
Chi 1 dr·en, J..1, 34-38.
Bear·d, Char-1 es < 1 '7'6'7'). The industr-ial r-e•..,.•ol,.Jtion.
New York: Greenwood Pr-ess Publisher-s.
Bellin, i1·!ynfor-d &: t·-..la. t:.opo'.J 1 os, Dimitr-i s ( 1'7'76) • Later·
development of syntax in bilinquals and monoglot
chi 1 dr·en. <Final Repor·t). Lc•nct.:m, England: Socia.l
Science Research Council. <Eric Document
Reproduction No. ED 154 606).
84
E:us.c-3.';\lia, Leo, Ph.D. <1981). The disa.bled and theirparents: A counseling challenge. Thor-ofar-e, N.J.:
Char-les 8. Slack, lnc.
Castellana, Joseph A. <1972). Human motivation and
lear-ning. New York: MSS Infor-mation Cor-poration.
Char-row, V. (1976). A linguist's view of manual
English. In Crammatte ~ Crammatte <Eds.).
Proceedings of the Seventh World Congress of the
W.F.D. (pp. 78-86). Silver Springs, Maryland:
National Association of the Deaf.
Cc•kely, D.~ Ga.wli~~, ~:. (197::::). Option·:.: A position
paper on the relationship between manual English and
sign. The Deaf Amer-ica.n, 25:9, 7-11.
Cokely, D. (1980). Sign language professions. In Baker,
Char-lotte~ Battison, Robbin <Eds.). Sign language
and the deaf community (pp. 137-158). Silver
Springs, Maryland: National Association of the Deaf.
Cokely, Dennis. (1983). When is a pidgin not a pidgin?
An alternate analysis of the ASL-English contact
situation. Sign Langt.J.S~.ge Studies, 38, 1-25.
Collier-'s Encyclopedia <1985). Industr-ial
r-e•.,...olution, 12, 757-766. Net.o..t "Yor-k: 1'1acmill.:..n
Educational Company.
Connor, Fra.nces P., Ed.D. (1981). Per-specti\,•es on ear-l::.-·
childhood program·:.. The Exceptional Parent, JJ.J..l,
83-86.
Cook, Vivian J. (1977). Cognitive pr-ocess in second
1.~.ngua.ge lea.rning. IRAL,
15, 1-20.
Cor·der, S. P. (1981). Formal simplicity and functional
simplification in second language acquisition. In
Robert W. Andersen <Ed.>. New dimensions in second
l.S~.nguage acquisition r-esea.r·•:h <pp.
146-152). Rowle~,...,
Massachusetts: Newbur-y House Publisher-s, Inc.
85
Crammatte, Alan 8. <1987). Meeting the challenge:
Hearing-impaired professionals in the work place.
Washington D.C.: Gallaudet University Press.
Crandall, Kathleen E. <1980). English proficiency and
pr- ogr· e-s:.s ma.de b:;.-· NT I D s t tJ dents. Amer- i c ;;..n Ann a 1 -=· of
the Deaf, 125:1, 417-426.
Cr-oss, T. (1977). Mother-~s speech adjustments: the
contr-ibution of selected child listener- var-iables.
In C. Snov.J & C. Fer-gu-::.on <Ed-:.. ). Talking tc• d"ti ldr-en
Cpp. 151-188). New York: Cambridge University Press.
Cunningham, Roger T. (1971). Developing quest i c•n ask~ i ng
'5·k i 11 s. In J.:<.me-:. E. v-~ei ga.nd <Ed.) • Developinq
teacher- competencies Cpp. 81-130). Eng 1 et..•.Jood
Cliffs, New Jer-sey: Pr-entice-Hall, Inc.
Cur-tiss, Susan (1981). Dissociations between language
and cognition: Cases and implications. Jour-nal of
Auti-:.m and Develc•prnental Di'5.order-s, J.1, 15-:=:0.
Dulay, Heidi; Burt, Bar-ina & Krashen, Stephen (1982).
Language two. New Yor-k: Oxford Univer-sity Pr-ess.
Er-ting, Car-ol (1978>. Language policy and deaf
ethnicity. Sign l.Ec.nquage Studies., 19, 139-152.
Er-ting, Car-ol (1980). Sign language and communication
between adults and children. In Charlotte Baker- &
Robbin Battison <Eds.). Sign language and the deaf
community Cpp. 159-176). Silver Springs, Maryland:
National Association of the Deaf.
Evans, Dilys M. (1980). Some aspects of par-ent
counseling in schools for the deaf. The Teacher- of
the Deaf, 4:3, 81-83.
Fathman, Ann (1975). The relationship between age and
second language productive ability. Language
Lear·n i ng, 25:2, 245-253.
86
Fr om•·~ in , 1) i c tor· i a :~ Rc•dman , Rc•ber· t ( 1 '7'8:3) • An
introduction to language. New YorK: Holt Rinehart &
~'H nston.
Gary, Judith Olmstead <1978). Why speaK if you don't
need to? The case for a listening approach to
beginning foreign language learning. In William C.
Ritchie (Ed.) . Second 1 angua.ge a.cgu i sit ion r·esearch:
Issues and implications <pp.185-200). New YorK:
Academic Pr·ess.
Ken ..ii (1981). S•::tme commc•n gc•al·:. for· second and
first language acquisition research. In Roger W.
Anderson <Ed.). New dimensions in second language
resear·ch (pp. 1-9). RotJ..Ile::~, t·-1assachusetts: Nev.Jbur·:>->
House Publishers, Inc.
Ha~{uta,
Holmes, Kathleen M. & Holmes, David W. (1980). Signed
and spoKen language development in a hearing child
of hear·ing parents. Sign Language Studies, 28,
23$'-254.
Hosfor·d, Phi 1 ip L. ( 1980). lmpr·oving the ~-i 1 ent
curr·icu1um. The•:)ry in Practice, 19:1, 45-50.
IchiKawa, Shin-Ichi <1983). Verbal memory span, visual
memory span, and their correlations with cognitive
ta.s~\-::.• Japanese Ps·rchctlogical Resea.r·ch, 25:4,
173-180.
Jacobs, Leo M. (1974). A deaf adult speaKs out. Kendall
Green, Washington, D.C.: Gallaudet College Press.
Kant or· , Rebecca ( 1 S:'83) . Comrnu n i ca. t i ve interact i on :
Mother modification and child acquisition of
Amer·ican sign language. Sign Langua.ge Studies., 36,
233-2E:2
Ia
Kin tsch, ~'l. ( 1970) . Recogn it i c•n mernor·y in bi 1 i ng1..1a 1
subjects. Jour·na.l of ~..Jerbal Behavior·, 2, 405-409.
Klima, Edv.;ar·d S. & Bell ugi,
Ur·~.u1
a ( 1979). The -:;.iqns of
87
1 .an gu a.ge. Cambr· i dge, 1'1a s.s..ac h use t t s:
University Press.
Har·v.:~r·
d
Krashen, Stephen D. (1980). Second language acquisition
the•::.r·:>". (Summar·>·') Pr·oceedi nqs of the S';..·'mp•::.si I.HTI
Sponsored by the Carl and Durga Spiro Foundation.
Rio de Janero <ERIC Document Reproduction Service
Nc•. ED 202 252) .
Krashen, Stephen D. (1981a). Second language
acquisition and second language learning. New York:
Per· gam on Pr es.s.
Kr·.ashen, Stephen D. (1981b). Aptitude and attitude in
relation to second language acquisition and
lear·ning. In Karl C. Diller· ·~Ed.). Indi>...ddua.l
differences and universals in language learning
aptitude <pp. 155-175). Rov.Jle·y, Ma·:.sachu<.::.etts.:
Newbury House Publishers, Inc.
Lado, Robert (1957). Linguis.tics a.cross cultures.
Ann Arbor, Michigan: The University of Michigan
Pr·es.s.
L.amber·t, W.all.ace E. (1972). Languag•?, pS'y'Cholc•q'/, and
culture. Stanford, California: Stanford University
Pr-es.s.
Landes, ,.James Ear·l e ( 1 975) • :=:peec h a.ddr· es-:.ed to
children: Issues and characteristics of parental
input. Langua.ge Lear·n i ng, 25:2, 355-379.
Lane, Harlan <Spring, 1980). Some thoughts on language
bigotry. (Report) An address on professional day,
California State University at Northridge,
Cal ifor·nia.
Lenneber·g, Er·ic H. (1967). Bic•logica.l foundatic•n of
language. New York: John Wiley and Sons, Inc.
Levine, Edna Simon Cl981). The ecology of earlY
deafness. New York: Columbia University Press.
I
88
Le··-li n~.on, l<en ( 1 984) . .Job mobi 1 i ty fc•r· the hear-ingimp.:dr-ed: The next cha.llenge in mains.tr-ea.ming. The
1
.Jc•l t a. Rev i evJ , 86 , E:5-97 •
Lowe, JoAnne Ber-r-y (1981). Self-concept and vocational
aspir-ations of adolescents. (Unpublished Master-s
thesis). Ca.l ifc•r-nia Sta.te Univer-sity -E"I.t N•=:tr·thr-idge.
. .licz, Har·r·~~ (1$'74). Is -:.ign Engl i-:.h? <Repc•r·t>
Fir-st Annual Confer-ence on Sign Language. Washington
D.C.: Gallaudet College.
t·1ar·~<•::.t..
Mar-kowicz, Har-r-y (1977-1978). Educational goals and the
deaf ima.ge. Teachinq English to the Dea.f, 4:3,
11-15.
Mar-mor-, G. & Pettito, L. (1979). Simultaneous communication in the classr-oom: How well is English gr-ammarrepresented? Sign Language Studies, 2:=:, '7'9-13C:.•
Maslow, Abraham M. (1977). A theory of human
motivation. In Don E. Hamachek <Ed.). Human dynamics
in psychology and education: Selected r-eadings Cpp.
45-54). Boston, Massachusetts: Allyn and Bacon, Inc.
Maxwell, Madeline M. C1985a). Ethnography and education
c•f deaf children. Sign La.nguaqe Studies, 47, 97-109.
t'1a.>wJell, t1adeline 1'·1. (1985b). Sign l.:angua.ge instrtJcti•::.n
and teacher- pr·epar-.:a t ion. Sign Lanquaqe Studies, 47,
173-179.
Menchel, Rober-t <1984). Pr-eparation for the wor-ld of
t;,tor· ~~: • The 1-.)c•l t a. Re-.,. i ev..• , 86 , 71 -84 •
Mclaughlin, Barry (1978). Second language acquisition
in childhood. Hillsdale, New Jersey: Er-lbaurn
A-=-~-oc i ate-:.•
Mclaughlin, Barr-y (1982). Current status of r-esearch on
second language learning in children. Human
•
89
De·-...'e 1 opmen t,
25, 21 5-222.
Edith & Bentley, Ernest I. <1970). Listen to
the sounds of deafness. Silver Springs, Maryland:
National Association of the Deaf.
~·H11er,
Moores, Donald F. (1978; 1987). Educating the deaf:
Psychology, principles and practices. Boston,
Massachusetts: Houghton Mifflin Company.
1'1o.:)r· es, .Ju 1 i a. 1''1aes t a·:;. y ( 1 980) • Ea.r 1 y' 1 in gu i ·:.tic
environments: Interactions of deaf parents with
their infants. Sign Langua.ge Studies, 26, 1 -13.
t1or·gan, Donald E., Ph.D. <Nc•vember, 1982). C1Jrr·ent
research and resources for hearing-impaired infants
and children: An evening for pediatricians,
audiologists and medical professionals. CReport>
Lecture at Steven S. Wise Temple. Bel Aire,
C.alifornia.
Nor·ma.n, Donald A. <1972). The r·ole •::.f memor·;..·· irt the
understanding of 1 angua.ge. In J-E"~.me·::. F. 1-<a.vanagh &:
Ignatius G. Mattingly <Eds.). Language by ear and by
eve <pp. 277-289) • Cambr· i dge, t'1a·:;sachuset ts:
Massachusetts Institute of Technology Press.
Oller, John W., Jr. <1981). Research on the measurement
of a.ffe-ctive- var·iabl e-s: Sc•me- r·emaining que-:.tion-:.• In
Roge-r W. Anderson <Ed.). New dime-nsions in second
language acquisition r-ese-ar·ch Cpp. 14-27). f':ot,...J1ey,
Massachuse-tts: Newbury House Publishers.
Padden, Ca.r·ol ( 1 98€0 . The dea.f cc•mmun i ty and the
culture of deaf people. In Charlotte BaKer- & Robbin
Battison CEds.). Sign language and the- deaf
community Cpp. 89-104>. United States: National
Association for the Deaf.
Pa.ul ston, Chr-istina Bratt CApr-i 1, 1 980). Gener·ation of
ne-w ideas for te-aching and r-esear-ch. <Summary)
Proce-edings of the Symposium Sponsor-ed by the Carl
and Durga Spiro Foundation. Rio De Janero <ERIC
Document Reproduction Service No. ED 202 252).
90
Peters, Ann M. (1981>. Language learning strategies:
Does the whole equal the sum of the parts? In Karl
C. Diller· <Ed.). Individu-E~.l differ·ence,s and
universals in language learning aptitude Cpp.
:37-52) • RCt!All e::~, ~'1a-:.sach1JE.et t·:.: Nev.Jbury Hou-E-e
Publishers, Inc.
Pr·inz, Philip M. ae Prinz, Elizabeth A. (1979).
Simultaneous acquisition of ASL and spoken English.
Sign Language Studies, 25, 283-27'6.
PurKey, William W. (1977). Teacher beliefs and
behavi•::.r-:. th-EJ.t ha.ve a. positive impa.ct on -:.tudent
motivation and self-concept. In Don E. HamacheV.:
<Ed.). Human dynamics in psychology and education:
Selected readings <pp. 54-61>. Boston,
Massachusetts: Allyn and Bacon, Inc.
Reilly, Judy ae Mcintire, Marina L. (1980). American
sign language and pidgin sign English: What's the
difference? Sign La.nguage Studies, 27, 151-192.
F<:udman, Phyllis <1975). The par·ent le.:J.rn-:.• <Report)
Proceedings of the 47th Meeting of the Convention of
American Instructors c•f the Deaf <pp. 38:3-387>.
Washington D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office.
Scarcella, Robin C. ~e Higa, Corr·ine A. <1982). Input
and age differences in second language acquisition.
In Stephen D. Krashen, Robin C. Scarcella ae Michael
H. Long <Eds.) Child-adult differences in second
language acquisition (pp. 175-201). Rowley,
Massachusetts: Newbury House Publishers, Inc.
Schles-inger, Hilde S. ~-e Meadov-.~, Kathryn P. (l$'72).
Sound and sign; Childhood deafness and mental
health. Berkeley, California: University of
California Press.
Schc•we, Ben t·'l. <1979). Identity• crisis in deafness: A
humanistic perspective. Tempe, Arizona: Scholars
Press.
91
Schumann, John H. <1975>. Affective factors and the
problem of age in second language acquisition.
La.ngu.~.ge Le.9.rn i ng, 25, 209-23.:::..
Sitnick, Valerie; Rushmer, Nancy~ Arpan, Roberta
Cl977). Par·ent-infant communication: A pr·ogr·am of
clinical and home training for parents and
hea.r·ing-impaired infants. <Report) Inf.ant He.~.ring
Resource, Good Samaritan Hospital and Medical
Center. Portland, Oregon: Dormac Publishers.
Skutnabb-Kangas, Tove (1976). Bilingualism,
semilingualism, and school achievement.
Linguistische Berichte, 45, 55-64.
Stevens, Raymond (1980). Education in schools for deaf
children. In Charlotte Baker ~ Robbin Battison
<Eds.). Sign language and the deaf community Cpp.
177-191:>. United States: N.ationa.l Association of the
Deaf.
::;te1..o..1ar t, Da . ./i d A. C1983) • Bi 1 i ngu~.l education:
Teachers' opinions of signs. Sign Language Studies,
39' 1 45-1 6 7 •
Stokoe, William <1975>. The use of sign language in
teaching Engli·::.h. American Ann.als of the Dea.f, 120,
41 7-421.
Terzian, Aram L. ~Saari, Marjorie E. <1980).
Employment and related life experiences of deaf
persons in New Jersey. <Report) Institute of
Management and Labor Relations Center for Human
Res.our·•:es. New Brunswick, Het.o..t Jer·sey: Rutgers, The
State University of New Jersey.
Trybus, Raymond (1980). Sign language, power, and
mental health. In Charlotte Baker~ Robbin Battison
<Ed-:.• ). Sign language .:~nd the deaf communit·r· <pp.
201-217). United States: National Associa.tion of the
Dea.f.
Tucker, Ivan G. (1978). The principles and practices of
92
parental involvement. <Report) Proceedings of the
International Conference on Preschool Education of
the Hearing-Impaired Child, 1978 and After. Tel
Aviv, Israel: The Micha Society for Deaf Children.
Vaid, Jyotsna ~lambert, Wallace E. (1979).
Differential cerebral involvement in the cognitive
functioning of bilinguals. Brain and language,§,
92-110.
Vihman, Marilyn May~ Mclaughlin, Barry (1982>.
Bilingual and second language acquisition in
preschool children. In Charles J. Brainerd~ Michael
Pressley <Eds.). Verbal processes in children:
Pr· oqr e·:.s in c ogn i t i •v·e de'-..>e 1 opmen t r· esea.r c h <pp.
35-58). New York: Springer-Verlag.
Watson, Douglas; Anderson, Glenn; Ford, Nancy; Marut,
Paula~ Quellette, Sue (1983). Job placement of
hearing-impaired persons: Research and practices.
<Tech. Rep. No. 31) Rehabilitation Research~
Training Center on Deafness/Hearing Impairment.
Arkansas: University of Arkansas.
Har·ry <1980). Neur·a.l functional i-::.sues in
bilingual ism. <Summar·y) Proceedings of the Syrrll:::•c•sitJm
Sponsored by the Carl and Durga Spiro Foundation.
Rio de Janero: CERIC Document Reproduction Service
t-,lo. ED 20 2 252) .
~Alhitt.:..l<er,
Wilders, Thea~ Robson, Megan (1980). Parents in
pa.r·tner·ship. The Teacher· of the Deaf, 4:5, 142-147.
~·~oodwar· d,
James C1 973) . Some char· a•: t er· is tic:'::· of
pidgin sign English. Sign language Studies,~'
39-46.
t'·toodt;.Jar·d, .James C., .Jr. ( 1975) • Hov,t yotJ gonna get tc•
heaven if you can't talk with Jesus: The educational
establishment versus the deaf community. <Report)
Linguistics Research Lab. Washington D.C.: Gallaudet
College.
Woodward, James (1978). Some sociolinguistic problems
93
in the implementation of bilingual education for
deaf students. Proceedings of the Second NSSLRT <pp.
183-203). San Diego, California.
~-'loodt.....tar· d,
.J arne::. ( 1 '7'80) • Soc i o 1 in gu is tics r· e::.ear· c h on
American s i gn 1 an gu a.ge : An hi -:.tori c a 1 per· spec t i '·,}e •
In Cha.r·lotte Bal--~er· ae Robbin Ba.ttison (Eds). Sign
lancpJage and the dea.f cornrnunitz• Cpp. 117-134).
United States: National Association of the Deaf.
~AJoodt.oJar·d,
.James:~ Allen, Thomas <1'7'87). Clas·:.r·oom use
of ASL by teacher·::.• Sign Language Studies, 54, l-10.
~..toodv..t~~r·d,
.James :~ t·'1ar·kovJi cz, Ha.r·r·y ( 1 '7'80) • Pidgin sign
1 a.nguages. In ~AH 11 i am C. Stol--~oe <Ed.) • Sign a.nd
culture Cpp. 55-79). Silver Springs, M.D., Linstock
Pr·ess, Inc.