Sign Language and Psycholinguistic Process: Fact, Hypotheses, and Implications for Interpretation

  • Ryan D. Tweney
Chapter
Part of the NATO Conference Series book series (NATOCS, volume 6)

Abstract

It is true, as some of the papers in this conference have recognized, that laboratory studies of language cannot directly be carried over and used as models of naturally occurring language processes. Yet, even if laboratory experiments do represent artificial situations, the people in those experiments are very real. Thus, we cannot uncritically reject laboratory results any more than we can uncritically accept them. Instead, we should ask empirically just how relevant lab results are, and carry out the studies needed to find out. My work is based on long-standing psychological laboratory paradigms, but I hope that you will agree that it has much broader implications. Each of its implications will, of course, require separate test.

Keywords

Sign Language Relative Clause American Sign Language Linguistic Structure Linguistic System 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Anthony, D. A. Seeing Essential English. Vol I and II. Anaheim, California: Educational Services Division, Anaheim Union High School District, 1971.Google Scholar
  2. Barik, H. C. Simultaneous interpretation: Temporal and quantitative data. Language and Speech, 1973, 16, 237–270.Google Scholar
  3. Battison, R. Phonological deletion in American Sign Language. Sign Language Studies, 1974, 5, 1–19.Google Scholar
  4. Bellugi, U., and Klima, E. S. Aspects of sign language and its structure. In J. F. Kavanagh, and J. E. Cutting, (Eds.)., The Role of Speech in Language. Cambridge, Massachusetts: The MIT Press, 1975a.Google Scholar
  5. Bellugi, U., and Klima, E. S. Two faces of sign: Iconic and abstract. In S. Harnad, (Ed.)., Origins and Evolution of Language and Speech. New York: New York Academy of Sciences, 1975b.Google Scholar
  6. Bellugi, U., Klima, E. S., and Siple, P. Remembering in signs. Cognition: International Journal of Cognitive Psychology, 1975, 3, 93–125.Google Scholar
  7. Clark, H. H., and Clark., E. V.. Psychology and Language: An Introduction to Psycholinguistics. New York: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich, 1977.Google Scholar
  8. Conrad, R. Speech and reading. In J. F. Kavanagh, and I. G. Mattingly, (Eds.). Language by Ear and by Eye: The Relationships between Speech and Reading. Cambridge, Massachusetts: MIT Press, 1972.Google Scholar
  9. Eastman, G. C. Sign Me Alice: A Play in Sign Language. Washington, D.C.: Gallaudet College Bookstore, 1974.Google Scholar
  10. Fodor, J. A., Bever, T. G. and Garrett, M. F. The Psychology of Language: An Introduction to Psycholinguistics and Generative Grammar New York: McGraw-Hill, 1974.Google Scholar
  11. Fromkin, V. A. The non-anomalous nature of anomalous utterances. Language, 1971, 47, 27–52.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Gerver, D. Empirical studies of simultaneous interpretation: A review and a model In R. W. Brislin, (Ed.). Translation: Applications and Research. New York: Gardner Press, Inc., 1976.Google Scholar
  13. Goldman-Eisler, F., and Cohen, M. An experimental study of interference between receptive and productive processes relating to simultaneous translation. Language and Speech, 1974, 17, 1–10.Google Scholar
  14. Hewes, G. W. Gesture language in cultural contact. Sign Language Studies, 1974, 4, 1–34.Google Scholar
  15. Hoemann, H. W. The American Sign Language: Lexical and Grammatical Notes with Translation Exercises. Silver Spring, Maryland: National Association of the Deaf, 1976.Google Scholar
  16. Hoemann, H. W., The transparency of meaning of Sign Language gestures. Sign Language Studies, 1975, 7, 151–161.Google Scholar
  17. Jakobson, R. About the relation between visual and auditory signs. In R. Jakobson, Selected Writings II: Word and Language. The Hague: Mouton, 1971.Google Scholar
  18. Jakobson, R. On linguistic aspects of translation. In R. A. Brower, (Ed.)., On Translation. Cambridge, Massachusetts: Harvard University Press, 1959.Google Scholar
  19. Klima, E. S. Sound and its absence in the linguistic symbol. In J. Kavanagh and J. Cutting, (Eds.). The Role of Speech in Language. Cambridge, Massachusetts: The MIT Press, 1975.Google Scholar
  20. Lane, H., Boyes-Braem, P., and Bellugi, U. Preliminaries to a distinctive feature analysis of American Sign Language. Cognitive Psychology, 1975, 8, 263–289.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Liddell, S. K. Restrictive Relative Clauses in American Sign Language. Unpublished manuscript. The Salk Institute, La Jolla, California, 1975.Google Scholar
  22. Mallery, G. Sign Language Among North American Indians, Compared with that Among Other Peoples and Deaf-Mutes. First Annual Report of the Bureau of American Ethnology. J. W. Powell, (Ed.)., 1881, 263–552. (Reprinted 1972, The Hague: Mouton & Co.).Google Scholar
  23. Miller, G. A. and Isard, S. Some perceptual consequences of linguistic rules. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 1963, 2, 217–228.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Miller, G. A., and Nicely, P. E. An analysis of perceptual confusions among some English consonants. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 1955, 27, 338–352.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Saegert, J., Hamayan, E., and Ahmar, H. Memory for language of input in polyglots. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Learning and Memory, 1975, 7, 607–613.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Sales, B. D., Cole, R. A., and Haber, R. N. Mechanisms of aural encoding: VIII. Phonetic interference and context-sensitive coding in short-term memory. Memory and Cognition, 1974, 2, 596–600.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Siple, P., Fischer, S. D., and Bellugi, U. Memory for non-semantic attributes of American Sign Language signs and English words. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 1977, 16, 561–574.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Steiner, G. After Babel: Aspects of Language and Translation. London: Oxford University Press, 1975.Google Scholar
  29. Stokoe, W. C., Jr. Semiotics and Human Sign Languages. The Hague, Mouton, 1972.Google Scholar
  30. Stokoe, W. C., Jr. Classification and description of sign languages. In T. A. Sebeok., (Ed.)., Current Trends in Linguistics, Vol. 12: Linguistics and Adjacent Arts and Sciences. The Hague, Mouton, 1974.Google Scholar
  31. Stokoe, W. C., Jr. Sign Language structure, an outline of the visual communications systems of the American deaf. Studies in Linguistics, Occasional Paper #8 1960, Buffalo, New York.Google Scholar
  32. Tweney, R. D., and Heiman, G. W. The effect of sign language grammatical structural on recall. Bulletin of the Psychonomic Society, 1977, 10, 331–334.Google Scholar
  33. Tweney, R. D., Heiman, G. W. and Hoemann, H. W. Psychological processing of sign language: Effect of visual disruption on sign intelligibility. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 1977, 106, 225–268.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Tweney, R. D., and Hoemann, H. W. Translation and sign language. In R. W. Brislin., (Ed.), Translation: Applications and Research. New York: Gardner Press, Inc. 1976.Google Scholar
  35. Tweney, R. D., Liddell, S. K., and Bellugi, U. The perception of grammatical boundaries in ASL. Unpublished manuscript. Bowling Green State University, Bowling Green, Ohio, 1977.Google Scholar
  36. Woodward, J. C., Jr., A report on Montana-Washington implicational research. Sign Language Studies, 1974, 4, 77–101.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Plenum Press, New York 1978

Authors and Affiliations

  • Ryan D. Tweney
    • 1
  1. 1.Bowling Green State UniversityBowling GreenUSA

Personalised recommendations