In:Understanding Deafness, Language and Cognitive Development: Essays in honour of Bencie Woll
Edited by Gary Morgan
[Trends in Language Acquisition Research 25] 2020
► pp. 93–113
Chapter 6Age of acquisition effects in language development
Published online: 26 February 2020
https://doi.org/10.1075/tilar.25.06lil
https://doi.org/10.1075/tilar.25.06lil
Abstract
The most accessible language for deaf children is generally a sign language, but few children have input in sign languages
early in life. Late first-language acquisition of a sign language reveals age of acquisition effects that must be taken into consideration
by linguistic theories of acquisition. When deaf children access spoken language through a cochlear implant, age of acquisition effects
can again be seen, and the presence or absence of sign language is an important factor in language outcomes. Finally, the development of a
sign language as a second language in unique contexts such as that of Christopher, a polyglot savant, can reveal more about the nature of
language development and the theories of language structure that must be posited.
Article outline
- 1.Introduction
- 2.Background
- 2.1Language domains and critical period effects
- 2.2Modality effects and age effects
- 3.Late L1 acquisition of sign languages
- 4.Deaf children with cochlear implants
- 5.Sign language acquisition in an atypical case: What Christopher can tell us
- The evidence: Christopher’s signed and spoken languages
- 6.Conclusions and implications
Notes References
References (63)
Anderson, D., & Reilly, J. (2002). The MacArthur communicative development inventory: Normative data for American Sign Language. Journal of Deaf Studies and Deaf Education 7(2), 83–106.
Baker, M. (2008). The macroparameter in a microparametric world. In T. Biberauer (Ed.), The limits of syntactic variation (pp.351–373). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Berk, S. (2003). Sensitive period effects on the acquisition of language: A study of language development (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). University of Connecticut, Storrs.
Berk, S., & Lillo-Martin, D. (2012). The two-word stage: Motivated by linguistic or cognitive constraints? Cognitive Psychology 65, 118–140.
Biberauer, T. (2008). Doubling vs. omission: Insights from Afrikaans negation. In S. Barbiers, O. Koeneman, M. Lekakou, & M. van der Ham (Eds.), Microvariations in syntactic doubling (pp.103–140). Bingley: Emerald.
Boudreault, P., & Mayberry, R. (2006). Grammatical processing in American Sign Language: Age of first-language acquisition effects in relation to syntactic
structure. Language and Cognitive Processes 21(5), 608–635.
Bruijnzeel, H., Ziylan, F., Stegeman, I., Topsakal, V., & Grolman, W. (2016). A systematic review to define the speech and language benefit of early (<12 months) pediatric cochlear
implantation. Audiology and Neurotology 21, 113–126.
Campbell, R., MacSweeney, M. & Woll, B. (2014). Cochlear implantation (CI) for prelingual deafness: The relevance of studies of brain organization and the role of first
language acquisition in considering outcome success. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience,
8, Article 834.
Caselli, N., Hall, W. & Lillo-Martin, D. (2017). Operationalization and measurement of sign language. (Commentary on paper by Ann Geers et al.) Pediatrics 140(5), e20172655B.
Chen Pichler, D. (2012). Language acquisition. In R. Pfau, B. Woll & M. Steinbach (Eds.), Sign language: An international handbook (pp.647–686). Berlin: De Gruyter.
Chen Pichler, D., & Koulidobrova, E. (2015). Acquisition of sign language as a second language. In M. Marschark (Ed.), The Oxford handbook of deaf studies in language: Research, policy and practice (pp.218–230). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Chen Pichler, D., Kuntze, M., Lillo-Martin, D., de Quadros, R. M., & Stumpf, M. (2018). Sign language acquisition by deaf and hearing children: A bilingual introduction. Washington, DC: Gallaudet University Press.
Cormier, K., Schembri, A., Vinson, D., & Orfanidou, E. (2012). First language acquisition differs from second language acquisition in prelingually deaf signers: Evidence from
sensitivity to grammaticality judgement in British Sign Language. Cognition 124, 50–65.
Curtiss, S., Fromkin, V., Krashen, S., Rigler, D., & Rigler, M. (1974). The linguistic development of Genie. Language 50(3): 528–554.
Davidson, K., Lillo-Martin, D., & Chen Pichler, D. (2014). Spoken English language development among native signing children with cochlear implants. Journal of Deaf Studies and Deaf Education 19(2), 238–250.
Dodd, B. (1979). Lip reading in infants: Attention to speech presented in-and out-of-synchrony. Cognitive Psychology 11, 478–484.
Emmorey, K. (Ed.). (2003). Perspectives on classifier constructions in sign languages. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Emmorey, K., Bellugi, U., Friederici, A. & Horn, P. (1995). Effects of age of acquisition on grammatical sensitivity: Evidence from on-line and off-line tasks. Applied Psycholinguistics 16(1), 1–23.
Ferjan Ramirez, N., Lieberman, A., & Mayberry, R. (2013). The initial stages of first-language acquisition begun in adolescence: When late looks early. Journal of Child Language 40(2), 391–414.
Flege, J., Yeni-Komshian, G., & Liu, S. (1999). Age constraints on second-language acquisition. Journal of Memory and Language 41, 78–104.
Geers, A., Mitchell, C., Warner-Czyz, A., Wang, N., & Eisenberg, L. (2017). Early sign language exposure and cochlear implantation benefits. Pediatrics 140, 1–9.
Hassanzadeh, S. (2012). Outcomes of cochlear implantation in deaf children of deaf parents: Comparative study. The Journal of Laryngology & Otology 126(10), 989–994.
Hawkins, R., & Hattori, H. (2006). Interpretation of English multiple wh-questions by Japanese speakers: A missing uninterpretable feature
account. Second Language Research 22, 269–301.
Jiménez, M., Pino, M., & Herruzo, J. (2009). A comparative study of speech development between deaf children with cochlear implants who have been educated with spoken
or spoken+sign language. International Journal of Pediatric Otorhinolaryngology 73, 109–114.
Johnson, J., & Newport, E. (1989). Critical period effects in second language learning: The influence of maturational state on the acquisition of English as
a second language. Cognitive Psychology 21(1), 60–99.
Kroffke, S., & Rothweiler, M. (2006). Variation im frühen Zweitspracherwerb des Deutschen durch Kinder mit türkischer Erstsprache. In M. Vliegen (Ed.), Proceedings of the 39th Linguistics Colloquium (pp.145–153). Bern: Peter Lang.
Lardiere, D. (1998). Dissociating syntax from morphology in a divergent L2 end-state grammar. Second Language Research 14, 359–375.
Levine, D., Strother-Garcia, K., Golinkoff, R., & Hirsh-Pasek, K. (2016). Language development in the first year of life: What deaf children might be missing before Cochlear
implantation. Otology & Neurotology 37(2), e56–e62.
Lillo-Martin, D., & Meier, R. (2011). On the linguistic status of ‘agreement’ in sign languages. Theoretical Linguistics 37, 95–141.
Lyness, C., Woll, B., Campbell, R., & Cardin, V. (2013). How does visual language affect crossmodal plasticity and cochlear implant success? Neurosci. Biobehav. Rev. 37, 2621–2630.
Massaro, D., & Simpson, J. (1987). Speech perception by ear and eye: A paradigm for psychological inquiry. Hove: Psychology Press.
Mayberry, R. (2010). Early language acquisition and adult language ability: What sign language reveals about the critical period for
language. In M. Marschark & P. Spencer (Eds.), Oxford handbook of deaf studies, language and education (Vol. 2; pp.281–290). New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
Mayberry, R., & Kluender, R. (2018). Rethinking the critical period for language: New insights into an old question from American Sign
Language. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition 21, 886–905.
Meier, R., & Newport, E. (1990). Out of the hands of babes: On a possible sign advantage in language acquisition. Language 66,1–23.
Meier, R., Cormier, K., & Quinto-Pozos, D. (Eds.). (2002). Modality and structure in signed language and spoken language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Meier, R., Mauk, C., Cheek, A., & Moreland, C. (2008). The form of children’s early signs: Iconic or motoric determinants? Language Learning and Development 4, 393–405.
Mitchell, R., & Karchmer, M. (2004). Chasing the mythical ten percent: Parental hearing status of deaf and hard of hearing students in the United
States. Sign Language Studies 4(2), 138–163.
Moon, C., Cooper, R., & Fifer, W. (1993). Two-day-olds prefer their native language. Infant Behav. Dev. 16, 495–500.
Morford, J. (2003). Grammatical development in adolescent first-language learners. Linguistics 41(4), 681–721.
Morford, J., & Mayberry, R. (2000). A reexamination of “Early Exposure” and its implications for language acquisition by eye. In C. Chamberlain, J. Morford, & R. Mayberry (Eds.), Language acquisition by eye (pp.111–128). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Niparko, J., Tobey, E., Thal, D., Eisenberg, L., Wang, N.-Y., Quittner, A., & Fink, N. (2010). Spoken language development in children following cochlear implantation. JAMA: Journal of the American Medical Association 303(15), 1498–1506.
O’Connor, N., & Hermelin, B. (1991). A specific linguistic ability. American Journal on Mental Retardation 95, 673–680.
Padden, C. (1983). Interaction of morphology and syntax in American Sign Language (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). University of California, San Diego.
Partanen, E., Kujala, T., Näätänen, R., Liitola, A., Sambeth, A., & Huotilainen, M. (2013). Learning-induced neural plasticity of speech processing before birth. PNAS 110, 15145–15150.
Peterson, N., Pisoni, D., & Miyamoto, R. (2010). Cochlear implants and spoken language processing abilities: Review and assessment of the literature. Restorative Neurology and Neuroscience 28, 237–250.
Roberts, I., & Holmberg, A. (2010). Introduction. In T. Biberauer, A. Holmberg, I. Roberts, & M. Sheehan (Eds.), Parametric variation: Null subjects in minimalist theory (pp.1–56). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
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). Washington, DC: Gallaudet University Press.
Schwartz, B. (2009). Unraveling inflection in child L2 development. Acquisition et Interaction en Langue Étrangère 1(1), 63–88.
Slobin, D. I., Hoiting, N., Kuntze, M., Lindert, R., Weinberg, A., Pyers, J., et al. (2003). A cognitive/functional perspective on the acquisition of “classifiers”. In K. Emmorey (Ed.), Perspectives on classifier constructions in sign languages (pp.271–296). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Smith, N. (2002). Jackdaws, sex and language acquisition. In Language, bananas and bonobos: Linguistic problems, puzzles and polemics. Oxford: Blackwell.
(2005). Backlash. In Language, frogs and savants: More linguistic problems, puzzles and polemics. Oxford: Blackwell.
Smith, N., & Tsimpli, I. (1995). The mind of a savant: Language-learning and modularity. Oxford: Basil Blackwell.
Smith, N., Tsimpli, I., Morgan, G., & Woll, B. (2011). The signs of a savant: Language against the odds. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Stone, A., Petitto, L.-A., & Bosworth, R. (2017). Visual sonority modulates infants’ attraction to sign language. Language Learning and Development 14, 130–148.
Tsimpli, I. (2014). Early, late or very late? Timing acquisition and bilingualism. Linguistic Approaches to Bilingualism 4(3), 283–313.
Tsimpli, I., & Dimitrakopoulou, M. (2007). The interpretability hypothesis: Evidence from Wh-interrogatives in L2 acquisition. Second Language Research 23, 215–242.
Werker, J., & Tees, R. (1984). Cross-language speech perception: Evidence for perceptual reorganization during the first year of life. Infant Behavior and Development 7(1), 49–63.
Woll, B., & Morgan, G. (2002). Conclusions and directions for future research. In G. Morgan & B. Woll (Eds.), Directions in sign language acquisition (pp.291–299). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Cited by (3)
Cited by three other publications
Göksun, Tilbe, Aslı Aktan‐Erciyes, Dilay Z. Karadöller & Ö. Ece Demir‐Lira
Karadöller, Dilay Z., Beyza Sümer & Aslı Özyürek
This list is based on CrossRef data as of 6 december 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.
