ArticleCognition2025
Deaf homesigners can create the foundations of phonetics and phonology without an adult linguistic model.
Article in Cognition, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Iconicity and transparency in Dutch Sign Language.Behavior research methods · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Children who are exposed to minimal linguistic input can nevertheless introduce linguistic features into their communication systems at the level of morphology, syntax, and semantics (Goldin-Meadow, 2003a). However, it is not clear whether they can do so at the level of phonetics and phonology. This study asks whether congenitally deaf children, unable to learn spoken language and living in a hearing family without exposure to sign language, introduce phonology and phonetics into the gestural communication systems they create, called homesigns. We focused on two foundational properties of phonetics and phonology--discreteness of forms, which is defined independently of meaning and thus forms the basis of duality of patterning. We examined index finger and open flat handshapes in deaf children's homesigns and their hearing mothers' co-speech gestures. We found that handshapes in deictic gestures were more discrete in homesign than in co-speech gesture. Moreover, the degree of discreteness depended on meaning (emblems vs. deictics) in co-speech gesture, but not in homesign. Children can thus create discrete forms that are meaning-independent in their homesign systems even without a model for this feature. This finding helps explain why this feature of language is universal in spoken and signed languages.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.