Sharing Ideas Gallaudet University Laurent Clerc National Deaf Education Center

A First Language: Whose Choice Is It?


Critical Period and Sign Language
About the Author

Introduction

A Win-Win Situation

Different Paths to Bilingualism

Keeping Expectations High

Emphasis on Speech Skills

Critical Period and Spoken Language

Critical Period and Sign Language

The Importance of Natural Language

References

Sharing Ideas Home Page
The fear that deaf children may never talk unless they are exposed exclusively to speech during an early, critical period has had a pervasive effect on practices in raising deaf children. Yet, only recently have the concerns of Deaf people and a handful of Deaf and hearing professionals been recognized—serious concerns over the consequences of not exposing Deaf children to Sign Language during the critical period for language acquisition. The question that has motivated so much denial of Sign Language might be appropriately reworded, considering that many deaf children around the world still enter school with very little language of any kind:
In approaches where the focus is on early efforts to teach spoken language, will the child miss the "critical period" for acquiring any first language?

This is the question posed in Sweden by linguists and psychologists who were concerned about the strict oralism that had persisted there for many years. If the critical period is missed because we are exposing the children only to speech while we wait to observe the effectiveness of training or cochlear implants, they pointed out, we run the risk that many children's limited access to the spoken signal will result in almost no early language (other than the idiosyncratic systems they have pieced together to get by). The Sign Language competence they do acquire when they are later exposed to it will be increasingly less proficient depending on the age it was acquired (Hyltenstam, 1992; Newport and Supalla, 1987). This lack of early first language competence, which has been shown to hamper acquisition of any language, results in the children progressing through their education only "semi-lingual" (Cummins, 1984; Paulston, 1977), and lacking the necessary cognitive, academic language proficiency to do well in school. Hence a cycle of failure for many deaf children (and for the schools for the deaf who receive these children after they have missed early chances at language and literacy, children who by this time are well-acquainted with frustration and failure).

While it is hard to imagine a setting in our world that includes no exposure to spoken language, many deaf and hard of hearing children in the United States today still grow up in environments that provide no exposure to signed language. Since we don't know and can't accurately predict some very important variables at the earliest stages, the possible consequences of even partial deprivation of accessible language at a critical time were important considerations in the decision to make Sign Language part of the early education of Deaf and hard of hearing children in Denmark and Sweden.

Laurent Clerc National Deaf Education Center

Contact Ken Kurlychek with comments or suggestions about this web page.
Last modified October 3, 1997
Copyright © 1997 All Rights Reserved
Laurent Clerc National Deaf Education Center
[ To
Gallaudet University's Home Page ] Gallaudet University
800 Florida Ave. NE
Washington, DC 20002-3695