Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-r5fsc Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-24T15:41:43.506Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Acceptability judgments still matter: Deafness and documentation

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  10 November 2017

Matthew L. Hall ,
Rachel I. Mayberry  and
Victor S. Ferreira
Matthew L. Hall
Affiliation:
Department of Linguistics, University of Connecticut, Storrs, CT 06269-1145. [email protected]://matthallresearch.com
Rachel I. Mayberry
Affiliation:
Linguistics Department, University of California at San Diego, La Jolla, CA 92037. [email protected]://mayberrylab.ucsd.edu/
Victor S. Ferreira
Affiliation:
Department of Psychology, University of California at San Diego, La Jolla, CA 92037. [email protected]://lpl.ucsd.edu/
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The target article's call to end reliance on acceptability judgments is premature. First, it restricts syntactic inquiry to cases were a semantically equivalent alternative is available. Second, priming studies require groups of participants who are linguistically homogenous and whose grammar is known to the researcher. These requirements would eliminate two major research areas: syntactic competence in d/Deaf individuals, and language documentation. (We follow the convention of using deaf to describe hearing levels, Deaf to describe cultural identity, and d/Deaf to include both. Our own work has focused on Deaf signers, but the same concerns could apply to other deaf populations.)

Type
Open Peer Commentary
Information
Behavioral and Brain Sciences , Volume 40 , 2017 , e293
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2017 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Boudreault, P. & Mayberry, R. I. (2006) Grammatical processing in American Sign Language: Age of first-language acquisition effects in relation to syntactic structure. Language and Cognitive Processes 21(5):608–35. doi:10.1080/01690960500139363.Google Scholar
Cleland, A. A. & Pickering, M. J. (2003) The use of lexical and syntactic information in language production: Evidence from the priming of noun-phrase structure. Journal of Memory and Language 49(2):214–30. doi:10.1016/S0749-596X(03)00060-3.Google Scholar
Ferjan Ramirez, N., Lieberman, A. M. & Mayberry, R. I. (2013) The initial stages of first-language acquisition begun in adolescence: When late looks early. Journal of Child Language 40(2):391–414. doi:10.1017/S0305000911000535.Google Scholar
Goldberg, A. E. (1995) Constructions: A construction grammar approach to argument structure. University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Hall, M. L., Ferreira, V. S. & Mayberry, R. I. (2012) Phonological similarity judgments in ASL: Evidence for maturational constraints on phonetic perception in sign. Sign Language and Linguistics 15(1):104–27.Google Scholar
Hall, M. L., Ferreira, V. S. & Mayberry, R. I. (2015) Syntactic priming in American Sign Language. PLoS ONE 10(3):e0119611. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0119611.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Mayberry, R. I., Chen, J. K., Witcher, P. & Klein, D. (2011) Age of acquisition effects on the functional organization of language in the adult brain. Brain and Language 119(1):16–29. doi:10.1016/J.Bandl.2011.05.007.Google Scholar
Mayberry, R. I. & Lock, E. (2003) Age constraints on first versus second language acquisition: Evidence for linguistic plasticity and epigenesis. Brain and Language 87(3):369–84. doi:10.1016/S0093-934x(03)00137-8.Google Scholar
Mayberry, R. I., Lock, E. & Kazmi, H. (2002) Linguistic ability and early language exposure. Nature 417(6884):38. doi:10.1038/417038a.Google Scholar