Araştırma Makalesi
BibTex RIS Kaynak Göster

İşaret dili ve okuma yazma öğrenimi

Yıl 2019, Cilt: 1 Sayı: 2, 70 - 87, 07.08.2019

Öz

İşaret dili işitme engelli bireylerin kullandığı, konuşma diline koşut bir dildir. Konuşma dilinde sesler için öngörülen sesletim yeri, biçimi ve ötümlülük gibi unsurların yerine işaret dilleri ellerin hareketi ve baş ve gövdeye göre olan konumuna göre tanımlanır. İşaret dillerinin de konuşma dili gibi kendine özgü bir dilbilgisi vardır ve sağır dilsiz bireylerin yaşadığı toplumun kullandığı sözlü dilden ayrı dildirler. Anne babaları işitme engelli olmayan ve dolayısıyla doğuştan bir işaret dili ile karşı karşıya kalmayan çocuklar da ev ortamında kullandıkları bir işaret dili geliştirirler. Çocukların bu becerilerinin her çocuğun doğuştan sahip olduğu ileri sürülen dil edinim becerisinin bir işareti ve sonucu olduğu düşünülmektedir. Sağır dilsiz çocuklar özel eğitim veren okullarda genellikle hem dudaktan okuma ve sesletim, hem işaret dili ve bir sure sonra da okuma yazma öğretimi ile yüz yüze kalmaktadırlar. Bu süreç ve yöntemler konusunda çeşitli çalışmalar yer almakla birlikte çocukların bu süreçten nasıl geçtikleri çok fazla betimlenmemiş bir konudur. Bu çalışmanın amacı çocukların evde geliştirdikleri işaret dilinin sınırlı sayıda sözcük bağlamında karşılaştırılması ve bu sözcükleri okumayı ve yazı, anlam ve resimleri nasıl eşleştirdiklerinin bir sınıf ortamında örneklenmesidir. Bu amaçla, Adana işitme engelliler okulunda eğitim gören 8 yaş grubundan üç ve 13 yaş grubundan 3 öğrenciye seçilmiş 10 temel sözcüğün resim ve yazı ile öğretilmesi sırasında video kayıtları yapılmıştır. Sonuçlar 13 yaşındaki çocukların sözcüğün hem yazılı biçimi hem de nesnenin resmini gördüklerinde işaret ve sesletim yoluyla sözcüğü ürettikleri, 8 yaşındakilerin ise sadece resimlere işaretle doğru yanıt verebildiklerini göstermektedir. 

Kaynakça

  • Acredolo, L. P., & Goodwyn, S.W. (2000). The long-term impact of symbolic gesturing during infancy on IQ at age 8. Journal of Instructional Psychology, 35(1), 3–11.
  • Bonvillian, J. D., Orlansky, M. D., & Novack, L. L. (1983). Developmental milestones: Sign language acquisition and motor development. Child Development, 54, 1435-1445.
  • Colin, K. E., Mirus, G. R., Mauk, C., & R. P. (2000). Acquisition of first signs: Place, hand shape, and movement. In C. Chamberlain, J.P. Morford, & R.L. Mayberry (Eds.), Language acquisition by eye. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Inc.
  • Goldin-Meadow, S., & Feldman, H. (1977). The development of language like communication without a language model. Science, 197, 401-403.
  • Goldin-Meadow, S., & Mylander, C. (1984). Gestural communication in deaf children: The effects and non-effects of parental imput on language development. Monographs of the Society for Research in Child Development, 49, 3-4.
  • Lenneberg, E. H. (1967). Biological foundations of language. New York: Wiley.
  • Lillo-Martin, D. (1999). Modality effects and modularity in language acquisition: The acquisition of American Sign Language. (In W. C. Ritchie & T. K. Bhatia Eds.), Handbook of language acquisition (pp. 531-567). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
  • Mayberry, R. L., & Eichen, E. B. (1991). The long-lasting advantage of learning sign language in childhood: Another look at the critical period for language acquisition. Journal of Memory and Language, 30, 468-512.
  • Mayberry, R. I., & Fischer, S. D. (1989). Looking through phonological shape to sentence meaning: The bottleneck of non-native sign language processing. Memory and Cognition, 17, 740-754.
  • Mayberry, R. I., Lock, E., & Kazmi, H. (2002). Linguistic ability and early language exposure. Nature, 417 (38) 1231-1246.
  • Meier, R. P. (2006). The form of early signs: Explaining signing children's articulatory development. In B. Schick, M. Marschark & P. E. Spencer (Eds,) Advances in the Sign Language Development of Deaf Children (pp. 202-230). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
  • Meier, R. P., & Newport, E. L. (1990). Out of the hands of babes: On a possible sign advantage in language acquisition. Language, 66, 1-23.
  • Morford, J. P., & Mayberry, R. I. (2000). A reexamination of early exposure and its implications for language acquisition by eye. In C. Chamberlain, J. P. Morford & R. I. Mayberry (Eds.), Language acquisition by eye (pp. 111-127)
  • Newport, E. L. (1990). Maturational constraints on language learning. Cognitive Science, 14, 11-28.
  • Newport, E. L., & Meier, R. P. (1985). The acquisition of American Sign Language. In D. I. Slobin (Ed.), The Cross-linguistic study of language acquisition (pp. 881-938). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
  • Pakaluk E, Neville H: Biological bases of language development. Retrieved November 15, 2018, from http://www.child encyclopedia.com/documents/Pakulak NevilleANGxp.pdf
  • Petitto, L. A. (2000). The acquisition of natural signed languages: Lessons in the nature of human language and its biological foundations. In C. Chamberlain,J. P. Morford & R. I. Mayberry (Eds.), Language acquisition by eye (pp. 41-50). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
  • Richards, J. C., & Schmidt, R. (2002). Dictionary of language teaching and applied linguistics. Longman Press.
  • Sandler, W., & Lillo-Martin, D. (2006). Sign language and linguistic universals. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
  • Schein, J. D., & Delk, M.T. (1974). The deaf population of the United States. Silver Spring, MD: National Association of the Deaf.
  • Stoke, W. C. (1960). Sign language structure: An outline of the visual communication system of the American deaf. Studies in linguistics, Occasional Papers 8. Buffalo, NY: University of Buffalo.
  • Tyrone, M. E., & Mauk, C. E. (2010). Sign lowering and phonetic reduction in American Sign Language. Journal of Phonetics, 38, 317-328.
  • Wilbur, R. B. (1990). An experimental investigation of stressed sign production. International Journal of Sign Linguistics, 1, 41-59.

Acquisition of sign language and literacy skills

Yıl 2019, Cilt: 1 Sayı: 2, 70 - 87, 07.08.2019

Öz

The term sign language is used to refer to the language of deaf people, parallel to the spoken language of hearing people. Deaf children who are not exposed to a sign language are also observed to develop their own sign system, which is called home signing, that they share with their parents. When such children attend school they are taught lip reading along with sign language and also taught how to read and write. How deaf children go through this process is an area which has scarcely been studied. The first aim of this study is to investigate whether there are individual differences between the signs that were produced by children and whether the signs are affected by peer interaction. For that reason, six deaf participants are selected from Deaf School in Adana, Turkey and divided into two age groups: 8 years old group (n=3) and 13 years old group (n=3). The second aim is to investigate how deaf children grasp the meaning of words through written forms and pictures. For this purpose, first, ten flash cards which illustrate ten Turkish words and then the pictures of these words were used to ask the participants to supply the sign for each picture. The results revealed that for 13 years of old group both written form of Turkish words and also their pictures were understandable. But for 8 years of old group only pictures were understandable and they couldn’t recognize written forms of Turkish words and also their meanings.

Kaynakça

  • Acredolo, L. P., & Goodwyn, S.W. (2000). The long-term impact of symbolic gesturing during infancy on IQ at age 8. Journal of Instructional Psychology, 35(1), 3–11.
  • Bonvillian, J. D., Orlansky, M. D., & Novack, L. L. (1983). Developmental milestones: Sign language acquisition and motor development. Child Development, 54, 1435-1445.
  • Colin, K. E., Mirus, G. R., Mauk, C., & R. P. (2000). Acquisition of first signs: Place, hand shape, and movement. In C. Chamberlain, J.P. Morford, & R.L. Mayberry (Eds.), Language acquisition by eye. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Inc.
  • Goldin-Meadow, S., & Feldman, H. (1977). The development of language like communication without a language model. Science, 197, 401-403.
  • Goldin-Meadow, S., & Mylander, C. (1984). Gestural communication in deaf children: The effects and non-effects of parental imput on language development. Monographs of the Society for Research in Child Development, 49, 3-4.
  • Lenneberg, E. H. (1967). Biological foundations of language. New York: Wiley.
  • Lillo-Martin, D. (1999). Modality effects and modularity in language acquisition: The acquisition of American Sign Language. (In W. C. Ritchie & T. K. Bhatia Eds.), Handbook of language acquisition (pp. 531-567). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
  • Mayberry, R. L., & Eichen, E. B. (1991). The long-lasting advantage of learning sign language in childhood: Another look at the critical period for language acquisition. Journal of Memory and Language, 30, 468-512.
  • Mayberry, R. I., & Fischer, S. D. (1989). Looking through phonological shape to sentence meaning: The bottleneck of non-native sign language processing. Memory and Cognition, 17, 740-754.
  • Mayberry, R. I., Lock, E., & Kazmi, H. (2002). Linguistic ability and early language exposure. Nature, 417 (38) 1231-1246.
  • Meier, R. P. (2006). The form of early signs: Explaining signing children's articulatory development. In B. Schick, M. Marschark & P. E. Spencer (Eds,) Advances in the Sign Language Development of Deaf Children (pp. 202-230). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
  • Meier, R. P., & Newport, E. L. (1990). Out of the hands of babes: On a possible sign advantage in language acquisition. Language, 66, 1-23.
  • Morford, J. P., & Mayberry, R. I. (2000). A reexamination of early exposure and its implications for language acquisition by eye. In C. Chamberlain, J. P. Morford & R. I. Mayberry (Eds.), Language acquisition by eye (pp. 111-127)
  • Newport, E. L. (1990). Maturational constraints on language learning. Cognitive Science, 14, 11-28.
  • Newport, E. L., & Meier, R. P. (1985). The acquisition of American Sign Language. In D. I. Slobin (Ed.), The Cross-linguistic study of language acquisition (pp. 881-938). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
  • Pakaluk E, Neville H: Biological bases of language development. Retrieved November 15, 2018, from http://www.child encyclopedia.com/documents/Pakulak NevilleANGxp.pdf
  • Petitto, L. A. (2000). The acquisition of natural signed languages: Lessons in the nature of human language and its biological foundations. In C. Chamberlain,J. P. Morford & R. I. Mayberry (Eds.), Language acquisition by eye (pp. 41-50). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
  • Richards, J. C., & Schmidt, R. (2002). Dictionary of language teaching and applied linguistics. Longman Press.
  • Sandler, W., & Lillo-Martin, D. (2006). Sign language and linguistic universals. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
  • Schein, J. D., & Delk, M.T. (1974). The deaf population of the United States. Silver Spring, MD: National Association of the Deaf.
  • Stoke, W. C. (1960). Sign language structure: An outline of the visual communication system of the American deaf. Studies in linguistics, Occasional Papers 8. Buffalo, NY: University of Buffalo.
  • Tyrone, M. E., & Mauk, C. E. (2010). Sign lowering and phonetic reduction in American Sign Language. Journal of Phonetics, 38, 317-328.
  • Wilbur, R. B. (1990). An experimental investigation of stressed sign production. International Journal of Sign Linguistics, 1, 41-59.
Toplam 23 adet kaynakça vardır.

Ayrıntılar

Birincil Dil İngilizce
Bölüm Araştırma Makaleleri
Yazarlar

Farzaneh Mahmoudi 0000-0001-7412-8646

Yayımlanma Tarihi 7 Ağustos 2019
Gönderilme Tarihi 3 Nisan 2019
Yayımlandığı Sayı Yıl 2019 Cilt: 1 Sayı: 2

Kaynak Göster

APA Mahmoudi, F. (2019). Acquisition of sign language and literacy skills. International Journal of Educational Spectrum, 1(2), 70-87.

465221.                    images?q=tbn:ANd9GcTlHwNdlfMtYefP6zNuxzJ7qJa6QuTIBRTFBQ&usqp=CAU         by.png                            open-access-logo-png-transparent.png                                                                       

IJES has a DOI number obtained from Crossref, is protected under the Creative Commons (cc-by) licence, and provides open access.