Age of acquisition effects differ across linguistic domains in sign language: EEG evidence

Individual differences in the neural dynamics of visual narrative comprehension: The effects of proficiency and age of acquisition

Understanding visual narrative sequences, as found in comics, is known to recruit similar cognitive mechanisms to verbal language. As measured by event-related potentials (ERPs), these manifest as initial negativities (N400, LAN) and subsequent positivities (P600). While these components are thought to index discrete processing stages, they differentially arise across participants for any given stimulus. In language contexts, proficiency modulates brain responses, with smaller N400 effects and larger P600 effects appearing with increasing proficiency. In visual narratives, recent work has also emphasized the role of proficiency in neural response patterns. We thus explored whether individual differences in proficiency modulate neural responses to visual narrative sequencing in similar ways as in language. We combined ERP data from 12 studies examining semantic and/or grammatical processing of visual narrative sequences. Using linear mixed effects modeling, we demonstrate differential effects of visual language proficiency and "age of acquisition" on N400 and P600 responses. Our results align with those reported in language contexts, providing further evidence for the similarity of linguistic and visual narrative processing, and emphasize the role of both proficiency and age of acquisition in visual narrative comprehension.

Predictive Processing in Sign Languages: A Systematic Review

The objective of this article was to review existing research to assess the evidence for predictive processing (PP) in sign language, the conditions under which it occurs, and the effects of language mastery (sign language as a first language, sign language as a second language, bimodal bilingualism) on the neural bases of PP. This review followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) framework. We searched peer-reviewed electronic databases (SCOPUS, Web of Science, PubMed, ScienceDirect, and EBSCO host) and gray literature (dissertations in ProQuest). We also searched the reference lists of records selected for the review and forward citations to identify all relevant publications. We searched for records based on five criteria (original work, peer-reviewed, published in English, research topic related to PP or neural entrainment, and human sign language processing). To reduce the risk of bias, the remaining two authors with expertise in sign language processing and a variety of research methods reviewed the results. Disagreements were resolved through extensive discussion. In the final review, 7 records were included, of which 5 were published articles and 2 were dissertations. The reviewed records provide evidence for PP in signing populations, although the underlying mechanism in the visual modality is not clear. The reviewed studies addressed the motor simulation proposals, neural basis of PP, as well as the development of PP. All studies used dynamic sign stimuli. Most of the studies focused on semantic prediction. The question of the mechanism for the interaction between one’s sign language competence (L1 vs. L2 vs. bimodal bilingual) and PP in the manual-visual modality remains unclear, primarily due to the scarcity of participants with varying degrees of language dominance. There is a paucity of evidence for PP in sign languages, especially for frequency-based, phonetic (articulatory), and syntactic prediction. However, studies published to date indicate that Deaf native/native-like L1 signers predict linguistic information during sign language processing, suggesting that PP is an amodal property of language processing.

Age of sign language acquisition has lifelong effect on syntactic preferences in sign language users

Acquisition of natural language has been shown to fundamentally impact both one's ability to use the first language, and the ability to learn subsequent languages later in life. Sign languages offer a unique perspective on this issue, because Deaf signers receive access to signed input at varying ages. The majority acquires sign language in (early) childhood, but some learn sign language later - a situation that is drastically different from that of spoken language acquisition. To investigate the effect of age of sign language acquisition and its potential interplay with age in signers, we examined grammatical acceptability ratings and reaction time measures in a group of Deaf signers (age range: 28-58 years) with early (0-3 years) or later (4-7 years) acquisition of sign language in childhood. Behavioral responses to grammatical word order variations (subject-object-verb vs. object-subject-verb) were examined in sentences that included: 1) simple sentences, 2) topicalized sentences, and 3) sentences involving manual classifier constructions, uniquely characteristic of sign languages. Overall, older participants responded more slowly. Age of acquisition had subtle effects on acceptability ratings, whereby the direction of the effect depended on the specific linguistic structure.

Acquisition of Sign Languages

Natural sign languages of deaf communities are acquired on the same time scale as that of spoken languages if children have access to fluent signers providing input from birth. Infants are sensitive to linguistic information provided visually, and early milestones show many parallels. The modality may affect various areas of language acquisition; such effects include the form of signs (sign phonology), the potential advantage presented by visual iconicity, and the use of spatial locations to represent referents, locations, and movement events. Unfortunately, the vast majority of deaf children do not receive accessible linguistic input in infancy, and these children experience language deprivation. Negative effects on language are observed when first-language acquisition is delayed. For those who eventually begin to learn a sign language, earlier input is associated with better language and academic outcomes. Further research is especially needed with a broader diversity of participants.

Sensitive periods in cortical specialization for language: insights from studies with Deaf and blind individuals

Studies with Deaf and blind individuals demonstrate that linguistic and sensory experiences during sensitive periods have potent effects on neurocognitive basis of language. Native users of sign and spoken languages recruit similar fronto-temporal systems during language processing. By contrast, delays in sign language access impact proficiency and the neural basis of language. Analogously, early but not late-onset blindness modifies the neural basis of language. People born blind recruit 'visual' areas during language processing, show reduced left-lateralization of language and enhanced performance on some language tasks. Sensitive period plasticity in and outside fronto-temporal language systems shapes the neural basis of language.