1

Openwithashortintroductionofmyinstitution,GallaudetUniversityinWashington,DC.theworld’sonly“Deafuniversity.”Currentlyabout1700students,mostlyundergraduate,butalsoincludes500graduatestudentsacross24areasofstudy.Weareabilingualinstitution,usingASLandEnglish.

2

IntheDepartmentofLinguistics,myhomedepartment,studentsdotheirreadingsandmostoftheirassignmentsinEnglish,butweuseASLintheclassroom,andmanystudentsaremoreproficientinASLthaninEnglish,sotheygetmoreoftheirlearningfromtheclassroomlecturesanddiscussionthanfromtheirreading.MostofushavenevergivenmuchthoughttohowweuseASLandEnglishforlearning,wejustswitchlanguagesasneeded.Forinstance,IteachgenerativesyntaxeveryyeartoourMAstudents,andthisinvolvesdetailedanalysisofsentencesfromEnglishandotherspokenlanguages.WedrawsyntactictreesforEnglishsentencesontheboard,butalsointheair,manipulatingthemtoderivedifferentstructures.Itwasn’tuntilItookasummershortcourseonbilingualteachingofferedbyourdepartmentofEducationthatIfirstlearnedthatweshouldbemorepurposefulinourbilingualclassroompractices,andreflectingonwhetherornottheyarepromotingeffectivelearning.ItwastherethatIheardtheterm“translanguaging”forthefirsttime,andIwasintrigued.IcouldsensethatitwashighlyrelevanttomanyaspectsofbilinguallifeatGallaudet,andpromisedimportantinsightsfornotonlywhatwedointheclassroom,butintheresearchlabaswell.Unfortunately,oneworkshopwasn’tenoughformetogetmuchofagraspofwhattranslanguagingwas,soIwasthrilledbytheopportunitytolearnmorewhenmycolleagueKarinAllardaskedmetobepartofthisconference.Throughher,Ihavediscoveredarichliteratureintheareaoftranslanguagingand

3

enjoyedmanystimulatingdiscussionsabouthowtranslanguagingcanbetranslatedintoclassroomapplication,particularinDeafclassrooms.I’veborrowedoneofherdescriptionsoftranslanguaginghere,fromherrecentbookchapterwithÅsaWedin.

3

Still,I’mverynewtotranslanguaging,andtherearestillmanyaspectsthatremainfuzzyorperplexingforme.I’msurethatmuchofmyconfusionstemsfrombiasesIcarrywithme,asaresultofmytrainingandexperiences.Iamagenerativelinguistspecializinginfirstlanguage(L1)acquisition,specificallyL1acquisitionofASLbyDeafchildren,orL1bilingualASLandEnglishacquisitionbyhearingchildrenofdeafparents(Iwillexpandthispointlater).Asagenerativelinguist,I’vebeentrainedinthenativisttradition,whichholdsthatchildrenarebornwithinnatepattern-seekingabilitiesandactivelyseekthelinguisticpatternsofthelanguagearoundthem.Thisinnatepattern-findingoccurswithsurprisingspeedandproceedsinsimilarfashion,regardlessofwhetherthetargetlanguageisaspokenlanguageorasignedlanguage;thehumanlanguagecapacityisamodal,orequippedtoworkwithlanguageineithermodality.Finally,asasignlanguagelinguist,IamofthemindthatsignlanguageslikeASLorSwedishSLarefull,naturalhumanlanguages,equaltospokenlanguagesinallrespects,butalsoendangeredandvulnerable,withanuncertainfutureascochlearimplantsbecomethenormfordeafinfantsandDeafschoolsclose,meaningthatfewerandfewerdeafchildrenhavetheopportunitytobecomeproficientsigners.

Fromthatshortsummaryofmybackground,youcanprobablytellalreadythatthis

4

willnotbeatypicalopeningkeynoteforatranslanguagingconference,sinceI’msureallofyouknowfarmoreabouttranslanguagingthanIdo.WhatI’dliketodotodayissketchoutforyouwhatkindofresearchIdo,andhowIhavesofarfoundtranslanguagingtoberelevanttowhatIdo.IwillalsomentionthemainareaswhereIamstillperplexedwithwhattomakeofthetenetsoftranslanguaging,whereIamnotsureifIagreewithwhatIhaveread.IinviteallofyoutocorrectmeifIhavemisunderstoodsomething,orshedlightontheaspectsoftranslanguagingthatIstillfindconfusing,andIlookforwardtothediscussionsthatthisconferencewillmakepossible.

4

CodasistheacronymcommonlyusedtorefertohearingoffspringofoneormoreDeafadults(Codaisageneraltermacrossallages,whileKodaissometimesusedtorefertochildCodas).WritingDeafwithacapitalDisaconventiondenotingdeafpopulationswhoregardthemselvesasformingaculturalgroupandtypicallyuseanationalsignlanguageasaprimarylanguage.MuchofmyresearchhasfocusedonbilingualdevelopmentofASLandspokenEnglishbyKodasages0-5.It’sbeenestimatedthatmorethan80%ofoffsringborntoDeafparentsarehearing,sothereisalargeconcentrationofKodasintheGallaudetarea.MostoftheKodastheminourstudyhavetwoDeafparents,soASListheirfirstlanguage,althoughtheytypically(inourarea)becomeexposedveryearlytospokenEnglishaswell,fromhearingfamilymembers,preschoolteachersandclassmates,etc.ThegeneraltrendisforKodastosignquitewellduringtheearlyyears,butthenbecomeEnglishdominantoncetheyenterschool.SubsequentdevelopmentoftheirASLafterschoolentryvarieswidely,withsomecontinuingtosignwell,whileothersplateauorsigninawaythatinvolveshighlevelsofmixingwithEnglish.Inthissense,Kodasqualifyasheritagesigners,paralleltoheritagespeakers,orchildrenofimmigrantswhospeaktheirhomelanguageinearlychildhood,butbecomedominantinthelocalmajoritylanguageoncetheyenterschool.

5

[Iwillnotsay muchaboutthisslidebeyondwhatiswritten.]Theideaof“incompleteacquisition”versus“divergence”isimportantforlanguageacquisitionresearcherslikemebecauseweviewlanguageasasetoffeaturesandrulesthataresharedbyacommunityoflanguageusers,moreorless(Irecognizethisisanidealizedmodel).Itisthesefeaturesandrulesthatachildneedstoacquirewhentheyacquirealanguage.Undernormalcircumstances,allchildreninaparticularlanguageusercommunitywillacquirethecoresetofallthosefeatures.Iftheydonot,theassumptionisoftenthatthereissomedisorderinvolvedthatpreventsthemfromcompletelyacquiringthelanguage.Analternativeview,hotlydebatedamongheritagelanguageresearchersnow,isthatit’sinaccuratetocharacterise heritagespeakersashavinganincompletegrammar.Rather,theyhaveadivergentgrammar,whichdevelopsinadifferentwayfrommonolinguals.Theargumentbythelattercampisthatbilingualchildren’sbrainsareorganizeddifferentlyfromthestart,andthatweshouldnotevenexpectthemtobehavelikemonolinguals,soitisinappropriatetousemonolingualsasthebaselinefrocomparison.

6

InourresearchatGallaudet, withmycollaboratorsattheUniversityofConnecticut(USA)andtheFederalUniversityofSantaCatarina(Brazil),westudytwogroupsofbilingualchildren,whichwecharacterizeasheritagesigners:HearingchildrenofDeaf,signingfamilies(“Kodas”,sometimesreferredtoas”childCodas”)andDeafchildrenfromDeaffamilieswhohaveacochlearimplant(DDCI).TheyaresimultaneouslylearningASLandEnglish,orBrazilianSignLanguage(Libras)andBrazilianPortuguese(BP),dependingonthecountrywheretheylive.

7

Whydoweconsiderthesechildrentobeheritagesigners?BasedonanumberofdivergentaspectsoftheirL1development. Inthenextfewslides,Iwillshareasampleoftheresultsthatwehavefromanalyzingthesignandspeechskillsofthesechildren,focusingonthesefourareas.

8

Koda scoresfallwithinrangeofNativecontrolscores (DeafchildrenfromDeaffamilies, withoutanycochlearimplant),sotheirreception ofASLiscomparable tothosenativesigners. Also, Kodas’ASLreceptiveskillsgenerallygetbetterwithage,althoughthe5- and6-year-oldKodas do*not*significantlydifferfromoneanother.

9

Movingontowordorder,Ishould firstgivesomebackgroundinformationonwordorderinASL.WhereasdeclarativesentencesinEnglishareverystronglySubject-Verb-Object(SVO),wordorderinASLisconsiderablymoreflexible.SubjectscanoccuraftertheVerb,resultinginVSorder,asintheexampleFALLPOINT-boy‘theboyfell.’Thiswordorderhasapragmaticfunction,confirmingthatsomethinghashappened,andthereisarestrictionthatthefinalSmustbeinpronounform(he,she,you,etc.),notafullnoun(likeBOY).InEnglish,wealsofollowastrictVOtemplate,butASLallowsobjectstoappearbeforetheverbinavarietyofcircumstances,usuallymarkedbytopicalization oftheobject,orsomespecialmorphologyontheverb.Soinsummary,ASLandEnglishsharecanonicalSVObasicorder,butASLallowsOV(licensedbyvarioustypesofverbalmorphology)andVS(licensedbysubject-pronouncopy)

InmydissertationfollowingwordorderdevelopmentfornativeDeafASLsignersfromDeaffamilies,childrenbetween20-30monthsalreadyusedVSproductively.However,inhiscomparisonofKoda andDDCIsigners,Palmer(oneofmyPhDstudents)foundthatthesechildrenmadeverylittleuseofVSorder,eventhoughtheyaregrowingupinDeafhouseholdswhereASListheprimarylanguage,andevenwhenheextendedtheagerangeto40months.Focusonthe“Combined”barallthewaytotheright,thatistherelevantbarfornow.

11

A similardifferenceappearswhenweconsiderrelativeorderofverbsandobjects.Inmydata,DeafofDeafchildrenusedOVorderinroughlyhalfoftheirutterancesthatincludedbothaverbandanobject.Incontrast,theOVorderwasvirtuallynonexistant intheKoda/DDCIdatabetween20-40months.

12

Plotted differently,youseeformthisgraphthatwhereasKodas/DDCIlooksimilarlyovertimetotheirDeafofDeafcounterpartsforuseofSVandVOorders(canonicalorders),theydivergequitesharplyintheiruseofOVandVS(noncanonical orders).

13

MovingontowordorderinWH-questions,here issomebackground first.WhereasEnglishreliablymovestheWHelementtotheinitialpositionofthequestion,ASLcanputtheWHelementininitialposition,finalposition,ordoubled,inbothinitialandfinalposition.Sohereagain,thepossiblewordorderallowedbyEnglishisasubsetofthewordorderspossibleinASL.

Inanelicited productiontaskrunonnativeDeafofDeafASLsigners,Lillo-Martinfoundthatchildrenusedall3wordorderoptionsfrom4yearsold,buttheyhadastrongerpreferenceforWHwordsininitialpositionat4,andbranchedouttousemoreFinalandDoublepositionsat5and6.WHquestionscomein3types,dependingonwhatelementofthesentenceisreplacedbytheWHword,andthisgraphonlyshowsresultsforObjectWHquestions(Whodidyousee?Whatdidyoubuy?).However,thesametrendwastrueforAdjunctWH,too.SubjectWH-questionswerepredominantlyWH-initialevenby6years,butotherwordordersstillincreasedovertime.

Incontast, thesametestrunonKodas andDDCIyieldedverydifferentresults,withalmostexclusiveuseofWH-initialquestionsatallagesexcept4yearolds,whostillusedsomefinalanddoubleorders.Incidentally,wealsohavelongitudinalspontaneousdataforsomeofthesechildren,andit’sworthmentioning thatatearlyages,one ofourKoda subjects,BEN, wasaraedy usingall3structuresbeforeageoftwo,comparabletosomeofournativeDeaf signers(ABYandSAL) in ageoffirstuseforall3betweenagesof1and2.Sowhileveryyoung,stillathome,Kodas mightlooklikeDeafcontrols,andweevenseethisalittleintheelicitedproductiondataonthisslide.Butoncetheyenterschool,wordorder changesto thepatternsweseeonthisgraph.

Soweseethatjustbased onthissampleofourdata,theKodas/DDCIdevelopsimilarlyinASLtotheirDeafcounterparts,butinothers,theydiverge.Thisistypicalofheritagespeakers’development.

17

Nowweturntoarelativelynewaspectofbimodalbilingualdevelopmentthathasattractedalotofattention:code-blending,orthecombinedproductionofsignedandspokenmaterial.Code-blendingstartsveryearly(this sampleisfromage1;10).ThecontentinASLandEnglishisnotidentical,althoughinthisexampleitismostlycongruent(butnotethemissingsubjectsinfirstASLclause). Also,notethattheEnglishmorphologyisnottarget-like.It’sdifficulttoknowwhetherthisreflectstypicalEnglishmorphologicaldevelopment,orifitistheresultofthecode-blend.

18

Koda child TOM’snarrativewithspiderinjar, retellingstoryinASLafterwatchingitonthecomputer.Notethatheisbimodalinmuchofhisproduction,signingandwhisperingatthesametime.HewasthenaskedtotellthestoryinEnglish,to whichhesays“Ican’tdoitinEnglish.”Afterthat,hespeaks,butwithlexicalinsertioncode-blends,andsomeinterestingnon-targetEnglish. [Videowillbesubtitledattalk]

19

HewasthenaskedtotellthestoryinEnglish,to which hesays“Ican’tdoitinEnglish.”Afterthat,hespeaks,butwithlexicalinsertioncode-blends,andsomeinterestingnon-targetEnglish. [Videowillbesubtitled]

20

OurgrouphasdevelopedtheLanguageSynthesisModel,whichattemptstoaccountforthevarioustypesofbilingualeffectsweobserveinKoda/DDCIproductionofEnglishorASL.Ideally,wefeelthatthemechanismshumanshaveforproducting codeblendsshouldbenodifferentthatthemechanismsalreadyavailableforallspeakers,whetherbilingualornot,whetheracquiringasignlanguageornot.Allhumansarebornwiththesameresources,sothesamebrainabilitythatproducesmonolingualspeechshouldalsobecapableofproducingsign+speech codeblends.Thedifferenceisthatbilingualshaveaccesstolinguisticfeaturesandvocabularyfrommorethanonelanguage,sotheyhavemoretochoosefromthanmonolingualswhengeneratingasentence.Andbecausebimodalbilingualshavetwodifferentchannelsofarticulationavailabletothem,thereisnothingthatinherentlypreventstwophonologiesfrombeingproducedatthesametime.

Ithinkthespiritofourmodelisverycompatiblewiththespiritoftranslanguaging,inthatwearesimplysayingbilingualshavearicherlinguisticrepertoirefromwhichtochoose,butotherwisetheyareusingthesamemechanismsasmonolinguals.Also,bothviewsmaintainthatthesebilingualeffectspersistintoadulthood;peopledon’tgrowoutofcode-blendingormixingorlanguagetransfereffects,althoughtheymay

21

learntoinhibitthemincertaincontexts.

21

Thisisanexampleofadultcode-blending. Iwilldemonstrateit.

22

Moreevidencethatlanguagesynthesisis apermanentfeatureofCodalanguage– ASLandEnglishinteractinprocessing,evenwhenCodaisfocusedononlyonelanguageandnottheother.All3studieshereemphasizethatbothASLandEnglishare“on”intheCoda’smindatalltimes,eventhoughtheymaysuppressontousetheother.Iftheysuppresslessheavily,code-blendingresults.

23

Sotosum up,weviewKodas andDDCIasheritagesigners,withanASLgrammarthatdivergesfromDeafsigners.ItisincompleteonlyiftheyaregiventhesameinputasDeafchildren,butfailtoacquireallaspectsofthatinput.Althoughmuchresearchremainstobedoneonthesubjectofinput,wesuspectthatCodasdoNOTreceivecomparableASLinputtoDeafnativesigners.NotonlyistheirASLexposurelargelylimitedtothehome(whereasDeafnativeshaveadditionalexposureatDeafschools,withDeaffriends,etc.),butadultsoftenmodifytheirsigningforKodas andmayrenderitlessvariedinwordorderandothergrammaticalaspects.

Andalthoughthereisnoresearchonthetopicatthemoment,wesuspectstronglythathaving*auditory*accesstospokenlanguagemakesitmuchmoreofaninfluenceonpeople’ssignlanguagethaniftheyonlyhavevisualaccess(asdoDeafbilingualswhoreadandwriteEnglish).Wedon’tseethesametypesoflanguagemixinginthesigningofDeafchildrenwithoutCIwhomwetested.

24

Codas areoftenmalignedintheDeafcommunityaspoorsignerswhousetoomuchEnglish.OurperspectiveisthatCodasarestillclearlynativesigners,buttheirASLisadifferentkindofnativesigningthanistypicallyobservedinDeafnativesigners.WideningourperspectiveonwhatcountsasnativeASLisreaffirmingtotheCodaswhogrewupinASLenvironments,feelthatASListheirlanguage,andfeelstrongconnectionstoDeafculture.Fromaresearchperspective,itopensthedoortounderstandingtherichandvariedwaysthatASLandEnglishinteractinthemind.

25

Soforallthereasonsmentionedinthelastslide,IseestrongparallelsbetweenwhatI’vereadabouttranslanguaging andourlanguagesynthesismodel.Bothemphasizeviewingabilingualasawholeentitythatcan’tbebrokenupintoan“ASLhalf”andan“Englishhalf.”Rather,thetwohavedevelopedintandemfromthestart,andareinextricablyinterlinked.WewanttorespectandvaluetheparticularwaysthatKodasandDDCIuseASL,reaffirmingtheirnativesigneridentityandrefrainingfromdenigratingtheirASLasinferiortothe“pure”ASLusedbyage-matchedDeafpeers.

BUTwhatdowedonext?RecognitionandreaffirmationareimportanttoredressthecurrentstereotypesinourcommunitythatKodas onlyuse“brokenASL”andareirreparablyinfluencedbyEnglish.ButthefactremainsthatasmanyKodas andDDCIgrowolder,theybecomeincreasinglyEnglish-dominant,andtheirASLskillsdecline,oftentothepointthattheirownfamiliesfindcommunicationdifficult.ThisisagreatconcerntoDeafparents,whowanttheirchildrentosucceedinEnglish,butalsorecognizethatstrongsigningskillsareacriticalpassintotheDeafworld.StrongASLnotonlyimprovescommunicationandfamilybondsathome,theyfacilitateCodas’movementwithintheDeafcommunity.Onthelargerlevel,ASLisanendangeredlanguagevulnerabletoquickdeclineSoweareveryconcernedwithlanguage

26

maintenance,bothatthecommunity/languagelevelandatthelevelofindividualheritagesighers.

26

Yetthatperspectiveseemsatoddswiththetranslanguaging literaturethatIhavereadsofar,whichdenouncelanguagemaintenanceasanexampleoftheideologyoflinguisticpurism,aviewdescribedashighlynegative.Inthisstudy(Martinezetal),teachersatabilingualschoolwereobservedintheclassroomandinterviewedontheirperspectivesonbilingualeducation.Whenoneteacher,duringalessoninSpanish,correctedachild’suseofanEnglishwordbyelicitingtheSpanishequivalent,theresearcherscommentedthatthisactbetrayedunderlyingideologyoflinguisticpurism.Thesamecommentoccurredwhentheteachernotedthatsheherselfmixeslanguagesmorewhensheistired.Alongasimilarline,anexcellentpaperbyOrtheguy etal.(2015)explainstolinguistaudiencesthatwemustgiveupourinsistencethat”namedlanguages”(suchasFrench,Swedish,English,etc.)areactuallinguisticobjectswithasetoffeatures,vocabulary,grammaticalrules,etc.thatachildcanacquire.Languagesinthatsenseareonlysocio-politicalconstructs,artificiallylabeledbysociety.Whatachildactuallyacquiresisanidiolect,asetoffeaturesthatnooneelsehasincommonwiththatchild,butwhichoverlapstoagreaterorlesserextentwiththeidiolectsofothersaroundher.Sofar,IcanagreewithOrtheguy etal;althoughaslinguistswecommonlytalkaboutacquisitionoflanguageAorB,weconcedethatthisisanidealizedmodel

27

ofacquisitionandthatofcourseindividualvariationisnormal,evenintheend-stategrammarofadults.ButOrtheguy etal,alsoseemtobesuggestingthatwhattheworldcalls“languagemixing”isthenormforbilinguals,thereforeweshouldrecognizethatandnotexpectanythingelse.Althoughtheyconcedethatmore“watchful”adherencetotherulesofonelanguageoranotherisnecessaryattimes,theycharacterizethosetimesasrare,andsuggestthattheendeavorofdevelopingthoseskillsarenotapriority.ThisisinstarkconflictwithhowthingsareintheDeafcommunity,wherewehavefoughtfordecadestoestablishASLinpeople’smindsasindependentanddistinctfromEnglish,andwherethereisintenseinterestinmaintainingandexpandingsigners’skillsin”ASLproper.”

27

Theseareafewexamples ofhowlinguisticpurism(asIthinktranslanguaing articleswouldcategorizethis)isviewedasnecessaryintheASLcommunity.Inthesecondexample,takenfromahalf-jokingpostbyawell-knownASLteacherintheUSatASLUniversity(Website),“peoplewhovoicein[ASL]class”arethrowninthelistwith“murders,rapists,childmolesters”and“wifebeaters.”[Awti isawell-knownCodaintheUSDeafcommunity,well-lovedbecauseofhismasterfuluseofASL.Hemaintainsavlog(videolog)aboutvariousaspectsofDeafandCodalife.Inthisscreenshot,heisexhortingDeafparentstopleaseuseASL“voice-off”withtheirCodachildren,becausehearingchildren(allhearingpeople)arehelplesslybiasedtoprioritizewhattheyhearoverwhattheysee.].

Underlyingthemeoftheseexamples:Howdohearing people(includingCodas)learnASLiftheyneverseparatethelanguages?

28

Ortheguy etal.arealsoveryclearontheideathatthe*goal*oftraditionallanguagemaintenanceiswrong-headed,andshouldgivewaytothemaintenanceofthe”mixed”bilingualoutputthatis currentlythenorminmanybilingualsocieties.Sotranslatingthistomycontext,IwouldinterpretthistomeanthatthehighlymixedASLsigningwesawintheclipsearliershouldbethenewstandardforASL,ratherthansomestandardtakenfromDeafchildrenoradults.Codasmakeupthegreatestproportionofnativesigners,afterall,aswesawintheearlierslide.

29

Butasmentionedearlier,heavymixingatsome pointrendersthemessageincomprehensibletoDeafaddressees.Howdoweavoidthiswithoutlanguageseparation?

30

Mynewcomerunderstandingofthetranslanguaging literatureisthatmostofitisfocusedondescribingandreaffirmingthebilingualvarietiesthatareusedbychildren,particularlychildrenlearningtospeaka2nd language,andadvocatingforeducationalpracticesthatincorporatethechild’sL1asanassetratherthanaliabilitytobebeatenout.Andagain,thisaspectoftheliteratureisveryrelevanttoourteachingatGallaudet.Inearlylearning,thequestionofhowwellyoucanuseonelanguagetotheexclusionoftheothertakesabackseat.Thatishowevernotsoclearlythecaseatthecollegelevel,wherestudentsareexpectedtodisplaycollege-agedproficiencyinEnglishandASL.Andit’snotclearlythecasewithKoda andDDCIchildren,whoneedstrongASLskillsasmembersoftheDeafcommunity.Translanguaging authorshaveconcededthatthedevelopmentoftheselanguage-specificskillsareadifferentmatterentirely,notthefocusoftheirwork,soIhavenotfoundmuchonthattopicyet.Somyrequestforhelpcomestoyou:Whatarethebestwaystoincreasechildren’sproficiencyinthe“languages”(sociallyandpoliticallydefinedastheymaybe)ofbilingualchildren?Issuchafocusinherentlycontradictorytotheobjectivesoftranslanguaging,asitsometimesseemstome,oristhereawaytodothisthatiscompatible?Ihopeverymuchthatthelatteristrue,andIlookforwardtolearningfromallofyou!

31

JLP:verbiagefromIPdocument

33

34