How (and why) does iconicity effect lexical access: An electrophysiological study of American sign language

An ERP investigation of perceptual vs motoric iconicity in sign production

The type of form-meaning mapping for iconic signs can vary. For perceptually-iconic signs there is a correspondence between visual features of a referent (e.g., the beak of a bird) and the form of the sign (e.g., extended thumb and index finger at the mouth for the American Sign Language (ASL) sign BIRD). For motorically-iconic signs there is a correspondence between how an object is held/manipulated and the form of the sign (e.g., the ASL sign FLUTE depicts how a flute is played). Previous studies have found that iconic signs are retrieved faster in picture-naming tasks, but type of iconicity has not been manipulated. We conducted an ERP study in which deaf signers and a control group of English speakers named pictures that targeted perceptually-iconic, motorically-iconic, or non-iconic ASL signs. For signers (unlike the control group), naming latencies varied by iconicity type: perceptually-iconic < motorically-iconic < non-iconic signs. A reduction in the N400 amplitude was only found for the perceptually-iconic signs, compared to both non-iconic and motorically-iconic signs. No modulations of N400 amplitudes were observed for the control group. We suggest that this pattern of results arises because pictures eliciting perceptually-iconic signs can more effectively prime lexical access due to greater alignment between features of the picture and the semantic and phonological features of the sign. We speculate that naming latencies are facilitated for motorically-iconic signs due to later processes (e.g., faster phonological encoding via cascading activation from semantic features). Overall, the results indicate that type of iconicity plays role in sign production when elicited by picture-naming tasks.

Between bodily action and conventionalized structure: The neural mechanisms of constructed action in sign language comprehension

Sign languages (SLs) are expressed through different bodily actions, ranging from re-enactment of physical events (constructed action, CA) to sequences of lexical signs with internal structure (plain telling, PT). Despite the prevalence of CA in signed interactions and its significance for SL comprehension, its neural dynamics remain unexplored. We examined the processing of different types of CA (subtle, reduced, and overt) and PT in 35 adult deaf or hearing native signers. The electroencephalographic-based processing of signed sentences with incongruent targets was recorded. Attenuated N300 and early N400 were observed for CA in deaf but not in hearing signers. No differences were found between sentences with CA types in all signers, suggesting a continuum from PT to overt CA. Deaf signers focused more on body movements; hearing signers on faces. We conclude that CA is processed less effortlessly than PT, arguably because of its strong focus on bodily actions.

Characterizing language production across modalities

ABSTRACTThis study investigates factors influencing lexical access in language production across modalities (signed and oral). Data from deaf and hearing signers were reanalyzed (Baus and Costa, 2015, On the temporal dynamics of sign production: An ERP study in Catalan Sign Language (LSC). Brain Research, 1609(1), 40-53. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.brainres.2015.03.013; Gimeno-Martínez and Baus, 2022, Iconicity in sign language production: Task matters. Neuropsychologia, 167, 108166. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2022.108166) testing the influence of psycholinguistic variables and ERP mean amplitudes on signing and naming latencies. Deaf signers' signing latencies were influenced by sign iconicity in the picture signing task, and by spoken psycholinguistic variables in the word-to-sign translation task. Additionally, ERP amplitudes before response influenced signing but not translation latencies. Hearing signers' latencies, both signing and naming, were influenced by sign iconicity and word frequency, with early ERP amplitudes predicting only naming latencies. These findings highlight general and modality-specific determinants of lexical access in language production.

Sign learning of hearing children in inclusive day care centers-does iconicity matter?

An increasing number of experimental studies suggest that signs and gestures can scaffold vocabulary learning for children with and without special educational needs and/or disabilities (SEND). However, little research has been done on the extent to which iconicity plays a role in sign learning, particularly in inclusive day care centers. This current study investigated the role of iconicity in the sign learning of 145 hearing children (2;1 to 6;3 years) from inclusive day care centers with educators who started using sign-supported speech after a training module. Children's sign use was assessed via a questionnaire completed by their educators. We found that older children were more likely to learn signs with a higher degree of iconicity, whereas the learning of signs by younger children was less affected by iconicity. Children with SEND did not benefit more from iconicity than children without SEND. These results suggest that whether iconicity plays a role in sign learning depends on the age of the children.