Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-gvvz8 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-28T01:27:32.710Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Do all aspects of learning benefit from iconicity? Evidence from motion capture

Part of: Iconicity

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  14 October 2019

ASHA SATO ,
MARIEKE SCHOUWSTRA ,
MOLLY FLAHERTY  and
SIMON KIRBY
ASHA SATO*
Affiliation:
Centre for Language Evolution, University of Edinburgh
MARIEKE SCHOUWSTRA
Affiliation:
Centre for Language Evolution, University of Edinburgh
MOLLY FLAHERTY
Affiliation:
Centre for Language Evolution, University of Edinburgh
SIMON KIRBY
Affiliation:
Centre for Language Evolution, University of Edinburgh
*
*Address for correspondence: e-mail: Asha.S.Sato@ed.ac.uk
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Recent work suggests that not all aspects of learning benefit from an iconicity advantage (Ortega, 2017). We present the results of an artificial sign language learning experiment testing the hypothesis that iconicity may help learners to learn mappings between forms and meanings, whilst having a negative impact on learning specific features of the form. We used a 3D camera (Microsoft Kinect) to capture participants’ gestures and quantify the accuracy with which they reproduce the target gestures in two conditions. In the iconic condition, participants were shown an artificial sign language consisting of congruent gesture–meaning pairs. In the arbitrary condition, the language consisted of non-congruent gesture–meaning pairs. We quantified the accuracy of participants’ gestures using dynamic time warping (Celebi et. al., 2013). Our results show that participants in the iconic condition learn mappings more successfully than participants in the arbitrary condition, but there is no difference in the accuracy with which participants reproduce the forms. While our work confirms that iconicity helps to establish form–meaning mappings, our study did not give conclusive evidence about the effect of iconicity on production; we suggest that iconicity may only have an impact on learning forms when these are complex.

Keywords

motion captureArtificial Sign Language learningiconicity
Type
Article
Information
Language and Cognition , Volume 12 , Issue 1: Special Issue on Iconicity , March 2020 , pp. 36 - 55
Copyright
Copyright © UK Cognitive Linguistics Association 2019 

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

references

Battison, R. (1978). Lexical borrowing in American Sign Language. Silver Spring, MD: Linstok Press.Google Scholar
Baus, C., Carreiras, M. & Emmorey, K. (2013). When does iconicity in sign language matter? Language and Cognitive Processes 28(3), 261–271.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Beykirch, H. L., Holcomb, T. A. & Harrington, J. F. (1990). Iconicity and sign vocabulary acquisition. American Annals of the Deaf 135(4), 306–311.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Celebi, S., Aydin, A. S., Temiz, T. T. & Arici, T. (2013). Gesture recognition using skeleton data with weighted dynamic time warping. In VISAPP (1) (pp. 620–625).Google Scholar
Dingemanse, M., Blasi, D. E., Lupyan, G., Christiansen, M. H. & Monaghan, P. (2015). Arbitrariness, iconicity, and systematicity in language. Trends in Cognitive Sciences 19(10), 603–615.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Emmorey, K (2018). Iconicity in sign language. Plenary at Evolang conference, Torun. Online <https://evolang.org/torun/proceedings/plenarytemplate.html?auth=karen>.Google Scholar
Fort, M., Weiss, A., Martin, A. & Peperkamp, S. (2013). Looking for the bouba-kiki effect in prelexical infants. Paper Presented at the 12th International Conference on Auditory-Visual Speech Processing, Annecy, 71–76.Google Scholar
Giorgino, T. (2009). Computing and visualizing dynamic time warping alignments in R: the dtw package. Journal of Statistical Software 31(7), 1–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Goldin-Meadow, S. & Brentari, D. (2017). Gesture, sign, and language: the coming of age of sign language and gesture studies. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 40, E46. doi:10.1017/S0140525X15001247CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hirata, S., Ukita, J. & Kita, S. (2011). Implicit phonetic symbolism in voicing of consonants and visual lightness using Garner’s speeded classification task. Perceptual and Motor Skills 113, 929–940.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Imai, M. & Kita, S. (2014). The sound symbolism bootstrapping hypothesis for language acquisition and language evolution. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 369(1651). https://doi.org/10.1098/rstb.2013.0298CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Imai, M., Kita, S., Nagumo, M. & Okada, H. (2008). Sound symbolism facilitates early verb learning. Cognition 109(1), 54–65.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kirby, S., Cornish, H. & Smith, K. (2008). Cumulative cultural evolution in the laboratory: an experimental approach to the origins of structure in human language. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America 105, 10681–10686.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lieberth, A. K. & Gamble, M. E. B. (1991). The role of iconicity in sign language learning by hearing adults. Journal of Communication Disorders 24(2), 89–99.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Lockwood, G. & Dingemanse, M. (2015). Iconicity in the lab: a review of behavioral, developmental, and neuroimaging research into sound-symbolism. Frontiers in Psychology 6. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2015.01246Google ScholarPubMed
Lockwood, G., Dingemanse, M. & Hagoort, P. (2016). Sound-symbolism boosts novel word learning. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition 42(8), 1274–1281.Google ScholarPubMed
Maynard, A. E., Slavoff, G. R. & Bonvillian, J. D. (1994). Learning & recall of word-sign pairs: the impact of sign etymology. Sign Language Studies 82(1), 55–78.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Meier, R. P., Mauk, C. E., Cheek, A. & Moreland, C. J. (2008). The form of children’s early signs: Iconic or motoric determinants? Language Learning and Development 4(1), 63–98.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Morett, L. M. (2015). Lending a hand to signed language acquisition: enactment and iconicity enhance sign recall in hearing adult American Sign Language learners. Journal of Cognitive Psychology 27(3), 251–276.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Motamedi, Y., Schouwstra, M., Smith, K., Culbertson, J. & Kirby, S. (2019). Evolving artificial sign languages in the lab: from improvised gesture to systematic sign. Cognition 192. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2019.05.001CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Namboodiripad, S., Lenzen, D., Lepic, R. & Verhoef, T. (2016). Measuring conventionalization in the manual modality. Journal of Language Evolution 1(2), 109–118.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nielsen, A. & Rendall, D. (2012). The source and magnitude of sound-symbolic biases in processing artificial word material and their implications for language learning and transmission. Language and Cognition 4, 115–125.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nygaard, L. C., Cook, A. E. & Namy, L. L. (2009). Sound to meaning correspondences facilitate word learning. Cognition 112(1), 181–186.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Occhino, C., Anible, B., Wilkinson, E. & Morford, J. (2017). Iconicity is in the eye of the beholder. Gesture 16(1), 99–125.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ortega, G. (2017). Iconicity and sign lexical acquisition: a review. Frontiers in Psychology, 8, 1280.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ortega, G. & Morgan, G. (2015). Phonological development in hearing learners of a sign language: the influence of phonological parameters, sign complexity, and iconicity. Language Learning 65(3), 660–688.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ortega, G. & Özyürek, A. (2013). Gesture–sign interface in hearing non-signers’ first exposure to sign. In Proceedings of the Tilburg Gesture Research Meeting (pp. 1–5). Tilburg: Tilburg University.Google Scholar
Ortega, G., Schiefner, A. & Ozyurek, A. (2017). Speakers’ gestures predict the meaning and perception of iconicity in signs. In Gunzelmann, G., Howe, A. & Tenbrink, T. (eds.), Proceedings of the 39th Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society (CogSci 2017) (pp. 889–894). Austin, TX: Cognitive Science Society.Google Scholar
Ortega, G., Schiefner, A. & Özyürek, A. (2019). Hearing non-signers use their gestures to predict iconic form-meaning mappings at first exposure to signs. Cognition 191, 103996.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ortega, G., Sümer, B. & Özyürek, A. (2017). Type of iconicity matters in the vocabulary development of signing children. Developmental Psychology 53(1), 89–99.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Perlman, M. & Lupyan, G. (2018). People can create iconic vocalizations to communicate various meanings to naïve listeners. Scientific Reports 8(1), 2634.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Perry, L. K, Perlman, M. & Lupyan, G. (2015) Iconicity in English and Spanish and its relation to lexical category and age of acquisition. PLoS ONE 10(9): e0137147.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Rosen, R. S. (2004). Beginning L2 production errors in ASL lexical phonology: a cognitive phonology model. Sign Language and Linguistics 7, 31–61.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sandler, W., Aronoff, M., Meir, I. & Padden, C. (2011). The gradual emergence of phonological form in a new language. Natural Language & Linguistic Theory 29(2), 503–543.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Smith, K., Smith, A. D. & Blythe, R. A. (2011). Cross-situational learning: an experimental study of word-learning mechanisms. Cognitive Science 35(3), 480–498.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Thompson, R. L., Vinson, D. P., Woll, B. & Vigliocco, G. (2012). The road to language learning is iconic: evidence from British Sign Language. Psychological Science 23(12), 1443–1448.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Tolar, T. D., Lederberg, A. R., Gokhale, S. & Tomasello, M. (2008). The development of the ability to recognize the meaning of iconic signs. Journal of Deaf Studies and Deaf Education 13(2), 225–240.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Verhoef, T., Kirby, S. & Boer, B. (2016). Iconicity and the emergence of combinatorial structure in language. Cognitive Science 40(8), 1969–1994.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed