The relationship between L1 antonym knowledge in a sign language (ASL)
and L2 reading comprehension in a spoken language (English)
Sarah Fish, Rama Novogrodsky, & Robert Hoffmeister
The Center for the Study of Communication and the Deaf, Boston University
Background
Antonyms are acquired early in the language
development process, as opposites are
distinguished easily based on lexical relationships
(Charles, 2000; Clark 1972).
Antonyms represent one facet of vocabulary depth
and strongly relate to reading achievement (Paul &
O’Rourke, 1988; Qian 2007).
According to Cummins (1979. 2000, 2003), there
is a reciprocal dependency of concepts, skills, and
linguistic
knowledge between one’s L1 and L2. This
study
examines whether this holds true for
languages
of different modalities: American Sign
Language
(ASL) and English. This is particularly of
interest
due to the fact that the L1 under
investigation
(ASL) does not have a written
modality,
so any transfer to the L2 (English) would
indicate that the mechanism is not modalitydependent.
§ We predicted that:
§  Older children will perform more accurately on
both tasks than younger children,
§  Deaf children of Deaf parents (DCDP) will
outperform Deaf children of hearing parents
(DCHP), and
§  ASL knowledge will influence English
knowledge, despite the modality difference.
Method
Participants took two tests: a) the Stanford Achievement Test - Reading
Comprehension (SAT-RC), which is an English reading comprehension test
consisting of 40 multiple-choice questions, and b) an ASL antonyms test
(ANT), a 14-item video-based receptive multiple-choice test that is part of
the ASL Assessment Instrument (Hoffmeister, et al., 1989).
Each question in ANT consisted of a prompt (1), followed by 4 response
options (in varying order) which included: the target (a), a phonological
foil to the prompt (b), a semantic foil (c), or an unrelated foil (d).
VAGUE
CLEAR
MOVIES
DARK
LIGHT (in weight)
(target)
(phon. to prompt)
(sem.)
(unrel.)
Results: Test scores
The scores of both groups improved with age on both tests, with DCDP
scoring higher than DCHP across all ages on both tests (Figures 1, 2).
Scores on ANT are correlated with age in both groups: DCDP (r = 0.25,
t(142) = 3.11, p ≤.002); DCHP (r = 0.16, t(384) = 3.27, p ≤.001).
100%
640
90%
70%
Participants
Age
8-9
10-11
12-13
14-15
16-17
18
TOTAL
*
*
*
*
DCHP
30
68
64
82
94
48
386
TOTAL
60
94
88
119
116
53
530
*
620
580
DCDP
50%
*
*
600
60%
DCDP
30
26
24
37
22
5
144
Table 1. Correlation between ANT and SAT-RC scores
Age
DCDP
Younger (8-11) r=0.60, t(54)=5.61*** r=0.24,
Older (12-18) r=0.47, t(86)=4.92*** r=0.18,
All (8-18)
r=0.55, t(142)=7.8*** r=0.23,
DCHP
t(95)=2.5
t(287)=3.15*
t(384)=4.61***
Discussion
§  There was developmental improvement in the
ANT and SAT-RC scores for both DCDP and DCHP.
This suggests that all Deaf children possess similar
potential for ASL acquisition, regardless of
whether or not they are acquiring ASL natively.
(prompt)
*
Results: Correlations
Whereas ANT and SAT-RC scores are strongly
correlated for DCDP, the correlation is significant
but not strong for the DCHP group (Table 1).
*p<.01, ***p<.0001
Sample ANT item:
80%
This poster can be downloaded at
http://www.bu.edu/cscd
*
*
DCDP
560
DCHP
40%
DCHP
§  However, DCDP significantly outperformed DCHP
at nearly every age in both tests. In a stepwise
regression analysis, scores on ANT explained 36%
of the variance and age added 8% more when
SAT-RC scores were the dependent variable.
Parental hearing status did not add to the
variance. Therefore, if all Deaf children, regardless
of parental hearing status, are provided with early
and adequate ASL input, it will foster both their L1
ASL and L2 English acquisition.
§  Finally, the results indicate that there is an
influence of ASL knowledge (L1) on the
development of English in print (L2) for Deaf
children, indicating that transfer between an L1
and L2 is not modality-dependent.
540
30%
520
20%
500
10%
0%
8-9
10-11
12-13
14-15
16-17
18
Figure 1. Average scores on ANT
by age and group
480
8-9
10-11
12-13
14-15
16-17
18
Figure 2. Average scores on SAT-RC
by age and group
Future directions
At present, we are in the process of analyzing data from
other tests in the ASLAI and their relationship to English
reading scores. Thus far, we have found positive
correlations between three ASL tests (synonyms,
antonyms, and rare vocabulary) and both English
vocabulary and English reading comprehension.
Partial funding for this research is provided by USDEd grant R324A100176 to the Trustees of Boston University. However, this research does not necessarily represent the policy of the USDEd, and you should not assume endorsement by the Federal Government.
We would like to thank the students, teachers, and staff at the data collection schools, for without their support and participation, this research would not be possible.