Rachel I. Mayberry∗, Charlene Chamberlain+, Gloria Waters # & Pauline Hwang∗
∗McGill University, +University of North Dakota, # Boston University
Background
How deaf readers recognize written words is not well understood. Deaf
college students who sign have been found to use phonological
decoding (Hanson & Fowler, 1987), but deaf children who speak have not
(Waters & Doehring, 1990). We ask here whether school-age children who
are deaf and sign use alternate means to decode written words. Two
possibilities are fingerspelling and sign decoding. Both kinds of coding
have been observed in adult readers who are deaf and sign (Treiman &
Hirsh-Pasek, 1983).
Fingerspelling has been found to improve deaf
student’s word recognition(Hirsh-Pasek, 1987) and correlate with reading
(Padden & Ramsey, 2000). Deaf children have been observed to use
fingerspelling as they write (Transler et al. (1999).Participants
48 students participated who had the following characteristics: (1) Age
range from 7 to 16 years; (2) born severely or profoundly deaf; (3)
educated with sign and speech since the age of 3; (4) 50% have deaf
parents; (5) 50% are girls. Reading levels ranged from grade 1 to 8 as
measured by the SAT.
Experiment I: Spelling-Sound Correspondence
Word recognition in relation to spelling-sound correspondence
was measured with a lexical decision task. Stimuli were 152
words and nonwords. Words were of 5 spelling-sound categories:
Regular (bust, dust); regular inconsistent (brave, cave) and
exceptions (have); ambiguous words (blown, flown vs. brown
clown); and strange (yacht, laugh) from Waters & Doehring
(1990).
Speed and accuracy of word recognition increased with reading
proficiency. Beginning readers showed spelling-sound effects,
but not in the expected direction, as Waters & Doehring (1990)
found for deaf children who speak and know no sign.
Beginning readers showed no effects of sign-word correspondence in
fingerspelling recognition, unlike the case for written word recognition.
Written word recognition was faster than fingerspelling recognition
independent of reading level, and more accurate up to a grade
5-6 reading level. This suggests that fingerspelling may not be used
for written word recongition, but rather for expressive and working
memory functions.
Beginning readers recognized more words with consistent sign-word
relations than words with inconsistent relations. More advanced readers
(grade 5-8) recognized words equally well, independent of sign-word
relationship.
This suggests that beginning deaf readers use their sign lexicon
in some way as they learn to read.Experiment IV: Fingerspelling Recognition
Word recognition in fingerspelling was measured with a lexical
decision task. The stimuli of Experiment II were used but presented
in fingerspelling on a computer screen (one letter at a time).
Experiment II: Sign-Word Correspondence
Word recognition in relation to ASL-sign and English word translation equivalence
was measured with a lexical decision task. Stimuli were 160 words and nonwords.
Words were of two translation types: Consistent sign-word relation (flag, hurt);
Inconsistent sign-word relation (meal, log); such English words are typically
fingerspelled in ASL.
Discussion & Conclusions
Deaf readers who sign do not show sensitivity to spelling-sound
correspondence in lexical decision the way hearing readers do. These
findings are similar to those for deaf readers who know no sign (Waters
& Doehring, 1990). Beginning readers recognize English vocabulary
they know in sign before other words up to a grade 3-4 reading level; in
lexical decision, they recognize these words more quickly and
accurately up to a grade 5-6 reading level. They also show a larger sight
vocabulary in print than in fingerspelling up to a grade 3-4 level.
Although sign-word correspondence shows effects on beginning
written word recognition, it shows no effects on fingerspelling
recognition.
Together these findings show that written word recognition
by children who are deaf and sign is complex and entails multiple
forms that become integrated over time with increasing reading
proficiency.
Hanson, V. L., & Fowler, C. A. (1987). Phonological coding in word reading: Evidence from hearing and deaf readers. Mem & Cog, 15, 199-207; Hirsh-Pasek, K. (1987). The metalinguistics of
fingerspelling: Reading Research Quarterly, 22, 455-474; Padden, C., & Ramsey, C. (2000). American Sign Language and reading ability in deaf children. In C. Chamberlain, J. P. Morford, & R. I. Mayberry
(Eds.), Language Acquisition by Eye (pp. 165-190). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum; Transler, C., et al. (1999). Do deaf children use phonological syllables as reading units? JDSDE, 4, 124-143;
Treiman, R. & Hirsh-Pasek, K. (1983). Silent reading: Insights from second-generation deaf readers. Cog Psy, 15, 39-65; Waters, G.S., & Doehring, D. (1990). Reading acquisition in congenitally deaf
children who communicate orally. In T. Carr & B. Levy (Eds.), Reading and Its Development (pp. 323-373). New York: Academic Press.
FUNDED by the Social Sciences and Humanities Council of Canada (410-2004-10232)
Mayberry Lab
Word Recognition in Children who are Deaf and Sign
Experiment III: Fingerspelling and Reading Vocabulary
Sight vocabulary was measured with the PPVT (Peabody Picture Vocabulary
Test) administered two ways. First the test was given in fingerspelling with no
speech or lip movement. A week later, the test was given again with written
words.
Sight vocabulary increased with reading proficiency in both fingerspelling and
reading. However, beginning readers recognized more English vocabulary in
print than in fingerspelling. By reading grade level 3 to 4, sight vocabulary in
fingerspelling and reading were equivalent.
This suggests that deaf children’s
orthographic knowledge is not the initially the same in fingerspelling and print
but that the two systems become integrated with reading experience.
Good night, and you too Rockdrummer. 