Cover not available

Article published In: Second Language Acquisition of Sign Languages: Acquisition d'une langue des signes comme langue seconde
Edited by Krister Schönström and Chloë Marshall
[Language, Interaction and Acquisition 13:2] 2022
► pp. 199–230

Get fulltext from our e-platform
JBE logo with link
PDF logo with download linkDownload PDF
EPUB logo with download linkDownload EPUB

Second language acquisition of depicting signs

A corpus-based account

 | Stockholm University
 | Stockholm University
Open Access logo
Available under the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) 4.0 license.

For any use beyond this license, please contact the publisher at rights@benjamins.nl.

Open Access publication of this article was funded through a Transformative Agreement with Stockholm University.

Published online: 23 February 2023
DOI logo with link
https://doi.org/10.1075/lia.22005.sch
Abstract
This paper concerns the acquisition of the sign lexicon in L2 learners of Swedish Sign Language. Sampled data (conversation and narrative retelling) from a longitudinal learner corpus with 16 adult L2 signers was analyzed and compared with data from nine L1 signers. The use of three broad types of signs was analyzed: lexical signs, partly-lexical signs (i.e. depicting signs) and non-lexical signs. The results revealed some differences between L1 and L2 signers, especially with regard to depicting signs. The number of depicting signs used by L2 learners increased over time, approaching the target language use. Qualitatively, we observed differences between L1 and L2 signers in their use of depicting signs, related to handshape choice and sign constructions. We discuss these findings in light of previous research linked to L2 vocabulary as well as the role of gestural knowledge in sign L2 acquisition.
Résumé
Cet article concerne l’acquisition du lexique chez les apprenants L2 de la langue des signes suédoise. Des données de conversation et de narration ont été sélectionnées dans un corpus longitudinal de 16 apprenants adultes signeurs L2. Ces données ont été analysées et comparées aux données de neuf signeurs L1. L’utilisation de trois grandes catégories de signes a été analysée : les signes lexicaux, les signes partiellement lexicaux (c’est-à-dire les depicting signs) et les signes non lexicaux. Les résultats ont révélé certaines différences entre les signeurs L1 et L2, en particulier en ce qui concerne les signes descriptifs. La quantité de signes descriptifs utilisés par les apprenants L2 a augmenté avec le temps, se rapprochant de leur utilisation dans la langue cible. D’un point de vue qualitatif, nous avons observé quelques différences entre les signeurs L1 et L2 dans leur utilisation des signes descriptifs, selon le choix de la configuration manuelle et selon la construction des signes. Nous discutons ces résultats à la lumière de recherches antérieures liées au lexique en L2 ainsi qu’au rôle de la connaissance des gestes dans l’acquisition d’une L2 gestuelle.
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.The sign language lexicon and depicting signs
    • Depicting signs with entity handshapes
    • Depicting signs with handle handshapes
    • Depicting signs with descriptor (size- and shape-specifying) handshapes
  • 3.Sign second language acquisition
  • 4.Purpose of the study
  • 5.Data and methodology
  • 6.Results
    • 6.1Analysis of the sign types
    • 6.2Distribution of the subcategories of depicting signs
    • 6.3Exploring the use of depicting signs
      • 6.3.1Handle handshapes instead of entity handshapes
      • 6.3.2Choice of handshapes
      • 6.3.3Simultaneous use of two depicting signs with two hands
  • 7.Discussion
  • 8.Conclusion
  • Acknowledgements
  • Notes
  • References
References (55)
References
Bardel, C., Gudmundson, A., & Lindqvist, C. (2012). Aspects of lexical sophistication in advanced learners’ oral production. Vocabulary acquisition and use in L2 French and Italian. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 34(2), 1–22. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Bochner, J. H., Christie, K., Hauser, P. C., & Searls, J. M. (2011). When is a difference really different? Learners’ discrimination of linguistic contrasts in American Sign Language. Language Learning, 61(4), 1302–1327. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Boers-Visker, E. (2020). Learning to use space: A study into the SL2 acquisition process of adult learners of Sign Language of the Netherlands. Doctoral thesis. Amsterdam: LOT.
Boers-Visker, E., & van den Bogaerde, B. (2019). Learning to use space in the L2 acquisition of a signed language: Two case studies. Sign Language Studies, 19(3), 410–452. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Brentari, D., Coppola, M., Mazzoni, L., & Goldin-Meadow, S. (2012). When does a system become phonological? Handshape production in gesturers, signers, and homesigners. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory, 301, 1–31. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Brentari, D., & Padden, C. A. (2001). Native and foreign vocabulary in American Sign Language: A lexicon with multiple origins. In D. Brentari (Ed.), Foreign vocabulary in sign languages: A cross-linguistic investigation of word formation (Lawrence E, Issue May 2016, pp. 87–119). Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Chen Pichler, D. (2011). Sources of handshape error in first-time signers of ASL. In G. Mathur & D. J. Napoli (Eds.), Deaf around the world: The impact of language (pp. 96–121). Oxford University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Chen Pichler, D., & Koulidobrova, E. (2016). Acquisition of sign language as a second language. In M. Marschark & P. E. Spencer (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of Deaf studies in language (pp. 218–230). Oxford University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Cormier, K., Quinto-Pozos, D., Sevcikova, Z., & Schembri, A. (2012). Lexicalisation and de-lexicalisation processes in sign languages: Comparing depicting constructions and viewpoint gestures. Language and Communication, 32(4), 329–348. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
ELAN 6.2 [Computer software], (2021). [URL]
Emmorey, K. (Ed.). (2003). Perspectives on classifier constructions in sign languages. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Ferrara, L., & Nilsson, A.-L. (2017). Describing spatial layouts as an L2M2 signed language learner. Sign Language & Linguistics, 20(1), 1–26. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Granger, S. (2015). Contrastive interlanguage analysis: A reappraisal. International Journal of Learner Corpus Research, 1(1), 7–24. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Gulamani, S., Marshall, C., & Morgan, G. (2022). The challenges of viewpoint-taking when learning a sign language: Data from the ‘frog story’ in British Sign Language. Second Language Research, 381, 55–87. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Hodge, G., & Johnston, T. (2014). Points, depictions, gestures and enactment: partly-lexical and non-lexical sign as core elements of single clause-like units in Auslan (Australian Sign Language). Australian Journal of Linguistics, 34(2), 262–291. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Hwang, S.-O., Tomita, N., Morgan, H., Ergin, R., Ilkbasaran, D., Seegers, S., … Padden, C. (2017). Of the body and the hands: Patterned iconicity for semantic categories. Language and Cognition, 91, 573–602. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Jarvis, S. (2015). The scope of transfer research. In L. Yu & T. Odlin (Eds.), New perspectives on transfer in second language learning (pp. 17–48). Multilingual Matters. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Johnston, T. A., & Ferrara, L. (2012). Lexicalization in signed languages: When is an idiom not an idiom? Selected Papers from the 3rd UK Cognitive Linguistics Conference, 11, 229–248.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Johnston, T. A., & Schembri, A. (2010). Variation, lexicalization and grammaticalization in signed languages. Langage et Société, 131(1), 19–35. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Kurz, K. B., Mullaney, K., & Occhino, C. (2019). Constructed action in American Sign Language: A look at second language learners in a second modality. Languages, 4(4). Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Laufer, B. (1990). Words you know: How they affect the words you learn. In Fisiak, J. (Ed.), Further insights into contrastive analysis (pp. 573–593). John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Laufer, B., & Nation, P. (1995). Vocabulary size and use: Lexical richness in L2 written production. Applied Linguistics, 16(3), 307–329. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Leeson, L., Sheridan, S., Cannon, K., Murphy, T., Newman, H., & Veldheer, H. (2020). Hands in motion: Learning to fingerspell in Irish Sign Language. Teanga, 11, (Special Issue), 120–141. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Lepic, R. (2019). A usage-based alternative to “lexicalization” in sign language linguistics. Glossa, 4(1): 23. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Liddell, S. K. (2003). Grammar, gesture, and meaning in American Sign Language. Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Marshall, C., Bel, A., Gulamani, S., & Morgan, G. (2021). How are signed languages learned as second languages? Language and Linguistics Compass, 15(1), 1–17. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Marshall, C., & Morgan, G. (2015). From gesture to sign language: Conventionalization of classifier constructions by adult hearing learners of British Sign Language. Topics in Cognitive Science, 7(1), 61–80. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Mesch, J., & Schönström, K. (2018). From design and collection to annotation of a learner corpus of sign language. In M. Bono, E. Efthimiou, S.-E. Fotinea, T. Hanke, J. Hochgesang, J. Kristoffersen, J. Mesch, & Y. Osugi (Eds.), Proceedings of the 8th Workshop on the representation and processing of sign languages: Involving the language community [Language Resources and Evaluation Conference (LREC)] (pp. 121–126). European Language Resources Association (ELRA).Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Mesch, J., & Wallin, L. (2015). Gloss annotations in the Swedish Sign Language Corpus. International Journal of Corpus Linguistics, 20(1), 102–120. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2021). Annoteringskonventioner för teckenspråkstexter. Version 8, maj 2021. [Annotation guidelines for sign language texts] (p. 56). Sign Language Section, Department of Linguistics, Stockholm University.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Morford, J. P., & MacFarlane, J. (2003). Frequency characteristics of American Sign Language. Sign Language Studies, 3(2), 213–225. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Müller, C. (2013). Gestural modes of representation as techniques of depiction. In C. Müller, A. J. Cienki, E. Fricke, S. H. Ladewig, D. McNeill, & S. Teßendorf (Eds.), Body–language–communication: An international handbook on multimodality in human interaction (pp. 1687–1701). De Gruyter Mouton.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Nation, I. S. (2001). Learning vocabulary in another language. Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Öqvist, Z., Riemer Kankkonen, N., & Mesch, J. (2020). STS-korpus : A sign language web corpus tool for teaching and public use. In E. Efthimiou, S.-E. Fotinea, T. Hanke, J. A. Hochgesang, J. Kristoffersen, & J. Mesch (Eds.), Proceedings of the 9th workshop on the representation and processing of sign languages: Sign language resources in the service of the language community, technological challenges and application perspectives [Language Resources and Evaluation Conference (LREC)] (pp. 177–180). Paris: European Language Resources Association (ELRA).Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Ortega, G. (2013). Acquisition of a signed phonological system by hearing adults: The role of sign structure and iconicity. Doctoral thesis, University College London.
(2017). Iconicity and sign lexical acquisition: A review. Frontiers in Psychology, 81. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Ortega, G., & Morgan, G. (2015a). Phonological development in hearing learners of a sign language: The influence of phonological parameters, sign complexity, and iconicity. Language Learning, 65(3), 660–688. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2015b). The effect of iconicity in the mental lexicon of hearing non-signers and proficient signers: Evidence of cross-modal priming. Language, Cognition and Neuroscience, 30(5), 574–585. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Ortega, G., Schiefner, A., & Özyürek, A. (2019). Hearing non-signers use their gestures to predict iconic form-meaning mappings at first exposure to signs. Cognition, 1911, 103996. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Ortega, G., & Özyürek, A. (2020). Systematic mappings between semantic categories and types of iconic representations in the manual modality: A normed database of silent gesture. Behavior Research Methods, 52(1), 51–67. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Riemer Kankkonen, N., Björkstrand, T., Mesch, J., & Börstell, C. (2018). Crowdsourcing for the Swedish Sign Language Dictionary. In M. Bono, E. Efthimiou, S.-E. Fotinea, T. Hanke, J. Hochgesang, J. Kristoffersen, J. Mesch, & Y. Osugi (Eds.), Proceedings of the 8th Workshop on the representation and processing of sign languages: Involving the language community [Language resources and evaluation conference (LREC)] (pp. 171–174). Paris: European Language Resources Association (ELRA).Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Saunders, D., & Parisot, A.-M. (2016). Constructed action in Quebec Sign Language (LSQ) amongst Deaf first language and second language users. Poster presented in the TISLR Conference, Melbourne, Australia.
Schembri, A. (2003). Rethinking “classifiers” in signed languages. In K. Emmorey (Ed.), Perspectives on classifier constructions in sign languages (pp. 3–34). Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Schembri, A., Jones, C., & Burnham, D. (2005). Comparing action gestures and classifier verbs of motion: Evidence from Australian Sign Language, Taiwan Sign Language, and nonsigners’ gestures without speech. Journal of Deaf Studies and Deaf Education, 10(3), 272–290. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Schick, B. (1990). The effects of morphosyntactic structure on the acquisition of classifier predicates in ASL. In C. Lucas (ed.), Sign language research: Theoretical issues (pp. 358–374). Gallaudet University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Schönström, K. (2021). Sign languages and second language acquisition research – An introduction. JESLA, The Journal of EuroSLA, 5(1). Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Schönström, K., & Mesch, J. (2017). Dataset. The project From speech to sign – Learning Swedish Sign Language as a second language. Department of Linguistics, Stockholm University.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Simper-Allen, P. (2016). “Cut and Break”-beskrivningar i svenskt teckenspråk: Barns och vuxnas avbildande verbkonstruktioner. Doctoral thesis, Sign Language, Department of Linguistics, Stockholm University.
Sykes, E. (Writer, Director), & Penington, J. (Producer). (1967). The Plank [Film]. Rank Film Distributors.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Talmy, L. (1975). Semantics and syntax of motion. In J. P. Kimball (Ed.), Syntax and semantics. Volume 4 (pp. 181–238). Academic Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Taub, S., Galvan, D., Piñar, P., & Mather, S. (2008). Gesture and ASL L2 acquisition. In R. M. de Quadros (Ed.) Sign languages: Spinning and unravelling the past, present and future. TISLR9, forty five papers and three posters from the 9th Theoretical Issues in Sign Language Research Conference, Florianopolis, Brazil, December 2006 (pp. 639–651). Editora Arara Azul.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Wallin, L. (1996). Polysynthetic signs in Swedish Sign Language. Doctoral thesis, Department of Linguistics, Stockholm University.
Cited by (3)

Cited by three other publications

Crume, Peter K., Jessica Scott, Christopher A. Kurby, Justin T. Malone, Virginia Troemel, Haeli Patel & Joseph P. Magliano
2025. American sign Language as a second language: assessing sensitivity to situational continuities when processing narratives in ASL and spoken English. Discourse Processes ► pp. 1 ff. DOI logo
Janke, Vikki, Lizzy Aumônier, Julia Hofweber, Marianne Gullberg & Chloë Marshall
2024. From gesture to Sign? An exploration of the effects of communicative pressure, interaction, and time on the process of conventionalisation. Linguistics 62:6 ► pp. 1499 ff. DOI logo
Mesch, Johanna
2023. Creating a multifaceted corpus of Swedish Sign Language. In Advances in Sign Language Corpus Linguistics [Studies in Corpus Linguistics, 108], ► pp. 242 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 25 november 2025. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers. Any errors therein should be reported to them.

Mobile Menu Logo with link to supplementary files background Layer 1 prag Twitter_Logo_Blue