DOCUMENT RESUME ED 334 723 EC 300 458 AUTHOR Mounty, Judith Lynn TITLE Nativization and Input in the Language Development of Two Deaf Children of Hearing Parents. Final Report. SPONS AGENCY Office of Special Education and Rehabilitative Services (ED), Washington, DC. PUB DATE 86 CONTRACT G008430017 NOTE 212p.; Ph.D. Dissertation, Boston University. PUB TYPE Dissertations/Theses - Doctoral Dissertations (041) EDRS PRICE MF01/PC09 Plus Postage. DESCRIPTORS American Sign Language; *Biological Influences; Case Studies; Child Language; *Deafness; Elementary Education; Environmental Influences; Ethnography; Interpersonal Communication; *Language Acquisition; Linguistic Input; Parent Child Relationship; Sign Language IDENTIFIERS *Nativization (Language) ABSTRACT This study examined the possible sources of variability in sign language mastery in two deaf children of hearing parents. The study considered the interaction of environmental and innate factors within the framework of the "Nativization" hypothesis, which suggests that all language learners initially constructa linguistic system which is somewhat unique and then gradually adapt to the environmental target language unless the input is inaccessible or inconsistent, in which case the learner creates grammatical constructions that further depart from the external norm. The ethnographic study focused on the sign language structure of thetwo children, ages 8 and 9, and the sign language used by theirmothers. The study found that, when presented with a variety ofinput, deaf children of hearing parents show a preference for AmericanSign Language (ASL) as a target language. Hearing parents whoare supportive of their children's involvement with deaf peopleand communicate in a way which approximates ASL appear to provide optimally useful environmental input. The child whowas more advanced at a younger age in his grammatical development subsequently developed a greater range of stylistic variation in hissigning. Appendices contain a glossary, hypothetical scenarios whichtypify four home environments for deaf children acquiring language,and guidelines for ethnographic data collection. (Over 100references are provided.) (JDD) *********A************************************************************* Reproductions supplied by EDRS are the best thatcan be made from the original document. *********************************************************************** UAL DEPARTMENTOf EDUCATION Office 01 Educational Research and irlpfoyement EDUCATIONAL RESOURCESINFORNIATIOPI CENTER (ERIC) (7 This document has Deen reOrOduCed wanted from the person originsting it or organization 1:1 Minor changes havbeen mad. to improve reproduction Qualify Points ot view or ment do not necessatilyopin.OnS stated intms docu- represent official OE RI position or policy Boston University School of Education NATIVIZATION AND INPUT IN THE LANGUAGE DEVELOPMENT OF TWO DEAF CHILDREN OF HEARING PARENTS Judith Lynn Mounty B.S. Boston University, 1974 M.Ed. Temple University, 1976 Submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Education 1986 BEST COPY AVAILABLE Approved by First Reader a es Paul Gee Assistant Professor of Education Second Reader ZaajZ Paula Menyuk Professor of Education Third Reader Robert J. Hoffeeist Professor of Education This research 4as supported bya Student Initiated Research Grant from the Office of Special Education,United States Department of Education, Grant Number 0008430017. Copyright by Judith Lynn Mounty, 1986. Acknowledgements I an grateful to The United States Department oi Education, Office of Special Education, for funding this project (Award Number 13008430017). The study is dedicated to my former students at the Hackett School in Philadelphia. As I watched them grow and learn, deep and pressing questiuns about language acquisition and deaf children formed in my mind. There came a point when I knew I had to find answers to my questions and that quest led to this dissertation study. The process of completing this dissertation ha.: allowedme tremendous personal and professiunal growth. I would like to express my appreciation to the many individuals who have sh4red this experience with me. To begin wi'zh, I wish to thank the members Lf my committee for their guidance and support: Dr. James P. See (chair), Dr. Paula Menyuk, and Dr. Robert J. Hoffmeister. Each of them offered vaiuble insights and suggest.ons from their particular perspectives. I as, first of all, grateful to Dr. Hoffmeister, who knewme as a teacher of young deaf childrensome years ago. He encouraged me to explore my questions about language acquistion in deaf children and topursue this degree in the process. Dr. Hoffmeister was a key person in the events that shaped the early lives ofmy research subjects. The children and their families were involved inan unique project that iv he implemented. One of the subjects has also been involved in his longitudinal research on language acquistion in deaf children. I am deeply grateful to Dr. Hoffmeister for sharing this data wi:Jime. During my years at Boston University, he providedme with the opportunity to work with his graduate students in neaf education and to be part of the training of new breed of teachers. Dr. Menyuk t;...ight ma much of what I know about language acquisition and psycholinguistics. She has supported my ideas and encouraged my research interests throughout the past four and half years. Dr. Gee listened carefully to my ideas about how languageis acquired by deaf children and ledme to a theory Oat might explain ahot my experience had shown me. :hallenging my intellect to the limit, he has contributed greatly tomy knowledge in many areas 4nd stimulaied many new interests. He provided countlss lours of instruction, guidance, and assistanceevery step of the way. I feel fortunate to have had him as my committee chairand mentor and look forward to our continued work togetheras colleagues. I am deeply indebted to Dr. Wendy Soodhart for sharing her work with me and for providing the initial database that made this study possible. Dr. Goodhirt as been a friend and colleague forthe past ten years. We have often exchanged ideas and I look forward to a continuation of this collaboration. I wish to sincerely thank the administrationand staif 124The Pennsylvania School for the Deaf in Philadelphia. They provided space and techrical assistance during the data collection,which ti vcurred in the midst of their move onto a new campus. Nevertheless, thuy were gracious and supportive hosts. There are no words that can adequately convey my gratitude to the families who participated in the study. They shared their memories, their thoughts, and their lives. They are both extraordinary hearing families with deaf children; dedicated to their children's best interests. They have much to offer educators of the deaf who wish to learn about environmental frrtors thatcan make a differeAce in how deaf children grow and learn. I also wish to thank Roberta Thomas for the ideas and friendshipwe shared during my struggles as a young deaf teacher of the deaf and her strugglesas a hearing mother of a young deaf child. Many acquaintances, friends and colleagues in the Deaf Community contributed to this study in variousways. Without them, there would have been no study. I must first thank Lillian Hoshauer and April Nelson for introducing me to A4L and the Deaf Commmunity some years ago. I especially want to recognize the cantributions of Bonnie Hughes-Nover who has been involved with thiswork since her participilt,on in Soodhart's (1984) study. Ms. Hughes-Nover provided the target model of ASL for aoth Dr. Gcodhart and myselfin our analyses of the sign languAge ofour child subjects. She also assisted in the data colloction for both studies. Most importantly, as a professional colleague arn1 friend, Ms. Hughes-Nover provided consultation and moral support during this study. I wish to thank Steve Nover for his feedback and assistance with respectto my vi 7 were both atBoston questions about ASLin the years that we for individuals,I extend my thanks University. To the following (they signed thestimulus story serving as informantsin the study related to the subjectmatter of thestudy): and answered questions Joan Ann Lauser andSherri Bonnie Hughes-Nover,Allen G. Talbert, Allen Talbert, andBen Behan viewedthe Drolsbaugh. Susan Phillip, signing the 'Roadrunner" tapes of the childrenand their mothers provided insights thathelped me analyze cartoon. In so doing, they narrative/discourse abilities. I am the subjects'grasmatical and in the final stagesof fortunate to have hadBen Bahan's input he could have movedto Boston analyzing the data. I only wish that have futureopportunities earlier in the studyand hope that we will tremendous Job in his to work together. Hartmut Tauber did a in ,,umerous transcription of theOita. Furthermore, he engaged me doing. Given his stimulating discussionsabout the work we were to have experience and expertisein linguistics,I feel fortunate been able to have hisassistance in this project. her assistance in I would like tothank Emily Dexter for to transcripts converting the longitudinalcomponent of the study Ms. which represent the datain Gee & Kegl (1992)terminology. work and wasextremely Dexter had also assistedDr. Goodhart in her supportive of mine. and Fran Routhier Boston Universitystudents, Diana Seremeth small but important assisted in the datacollection and in various vii aspects of the study. Former Boston University graduate student, Denise