Key Word Signing Has Higher Iconicity Than Sign Language.

Saved in:

Bibliographic Details
Title:	Key Word Signing Has Higher Iconicity Than Sign Language.
Authors:	Rombouts, Ellen¹ ellen.rombouts@kuleuven.be, Maessen, Babette¹, Maes, Bea², Zink, Inge¹
Source:	Journal of Speech, Language & Hearing Research. Jul2020, Vol. 63 Issue 7, p2418-2424. 7p. 2 Color Photographs, 1 Black and White Photograph.
Subject Terms:	Word recognition, Sign language, Communicative disorders, People with disabilities, Keywords, Facilitated communication, People with intellectual disabilities, Scale analysis (Psychology)
Abstract:	Purpose: Key word signing (KWS) entails using manual signs to support the natural speech of individuals with normal hearing and who have communication difficulties. While manual signs from the local sign language may be used for this purpose, some KWS systems have opted for a distinct KWS lexicon. Distinct KWS lexicon typically aims for higher sign iconicity or recognizability to make the lexicon more accessible for individuals with intellectual disabilities. We sought to determine if, in the Belgian Dutch context, signs from such a distinct KWS lexicon (Spreken Met Ondersteuning van Gebaren [Speaking With Support of Signs; SMOG]) were indeed more iconic than their Flemish Sign Language (FSL) counterparts. Method: Participants were 224 adults with typical development who had no signing experience. They rated the resemblance between a FSL sign and its meaning. Raw data on the iconicity of SMOG from a previous study were used. Translucency was statistically and qualitatively compared between the SMOG lexicon and their FSL counterparts. Results: SMOG had an overall higher translucency than FSL and contained a higher number of iconic signs. Conclusion: This finding may support the value of a separate sign lexicon over using sign language signs. Nevertheless, other aspects, such as wide availability and inclusion, need to be considered. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]
	Copyright of Journal of Speech, Language & Hearing Research is the property of American Speech-Language-Hearing Association and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites without the copyright holder's express written permission. Additionally, content may not be used with any artificial intelligence tools or machine learning technologies. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)
Database:	Education Research Complete

Description
Abstract:	Purpose: Key word signing (KWS) entails using manual signs to support the natural speech of individuals with normal hearing and who have communication difficulties. While manual signs from the local sign language may be used for this purpose, some KWS systems have opted for a distinct KWS lexicon. Distinct KWS lexicon typically aims for higher sign iconicity or recognizability to make the lexicon more accessible for individuals with intellectual disabilities. We sought to determine if, in the Belgian Dutch context, signs from such a distinct KWS lexicon (Spreken Met Ondersteuning van Gebaren [Speaking With Support of Signs; SMOG]) were indeed more iconic than their Flemish Sign Language (FSL) counterparts. Method: Participants were 224 adults with typical development who had no signing experience. They rated the resemblance between a FSL sign and its meaning. Raw data on the iconicity of SMOG from a previous study were used. Translucency was statistically and qualitatively compared between the SMOG lexicon and their FSL counterparts. Results: SMOG had an overall higher translucency than FSL and contained a higher number of iconic signs. Conclusion: This finding may support the value of a separate sign lexicon over using sign language signs. Nevertheless, other aspects, such as wide availability and inclusion, need to be considered. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]
ISSN:	10924388
DOI:	10.1044/2020_JSLHR-20-00034