American Sign Language (ASL) stands as a complete and natural language, possessing the same rich linguistic properties found in spoken languages. However, it uniquely expresses itself through the movement of hands and face, rather than vocal sounds. For many North Americans who are deaf or hard of hearing, ASL is their primary mode of communication, and it’s also embraced by many hearing individuals. While English relies on auditory signals and spoken words, ASL operates in the visual-manual modality. This fundamental difference highlights the fascinating question: what does ‘compare’ mean when we examine ASL alongside spoken languages? It’s not about superiority or inferiority, but rather understanding distinct yet equally complex systems of language.
ASL: A Language of Its Own
It’s crucial to understand that ASL is not simply a signed version of English. While it exists within an English-speaking country, ASL boasts its own grammar, syntax, and vocabulary, completely separate from English. This is a key point when we compare ASL to English. The structure of sentences, the way meaning is conveyed, and even the fundamental building blocks of language differ significantly. For example, English relies heavily on word order to indicate grammatical relationships, while ASL uses space, direction of movement, and non-manual markers like facial expressions to convey similar information.
Think about asking a question. In spoken English, we might raise our pitch or adjust word order. In ASL, questioning is often indicated by raising eyebrows, widening eyes, and tilting the body forward. These visual cues are integral to ASL grammar, highlighting a stark comparison in how languages utilize different modalities to achieve the same communicative goals.
Global Diversity of Sign Languages
Just as spoken languages vary across the globe, so do sign languages. There isn’t a universal sign language understood by all. British Sign Language (BSL), for example, is distinct from ASL, meaning someone fluent in ASL might not understand BSL. When we compare sign languages internationally, we see a rich tapestry of linguistic diversity. Some sign languages might borrow elements from ASL, but they evolve independently, reflecting the unique cultural and linguistic contexts of their communities. This mirrors the way spoken languages diverge and develop regional variations.
The Origins and Evolution of ASL
Unlike some invented languages, ASL wasn’t created by a single person or committee. Its origins are rooted in history, tracing back over 200 years. It’s believed that ASL emerged from a blend of local sign languages and French Sign Language (LSF). This historical intermingling is a fascinating point of comparison to how many spoken languages develop, often through contact and interaction between different linguistic groups. Modern ASL retains some influence from LSF, but it has evolved into a unique and mature language, distinct from contemporary LSF. While some signs might share historical roots, users of modern ASL and LSF can no longer understand each other fluently. This linguistic divergence over time is a common phenomenon when we compare the evolution of different languages, both signed and spoken.
Learning ASL: A Natural Process
Children typically acquire their first language naturally, often from their parents. For deaf children born to deaf parents who already use ASL, language acquisition unfolds as naturally as spoken language acquisition for hearing children. However, the situation differs for deaf children with hearing parents who are unfamiliar with ASL. Interestingly, the majority of deaf children are born to hearing parents. Many hearing parents choose to introduce sign language to their deaf children, often learning alongside them. Deaf peers also play a crucial role in ASL acquisition for deaf children, fostering fluency and natural language development. When we compare language acquisition in deaf and hearing children, we see that the fundamental human capacity for language is adaptable and can thrive in different modalities, whether auditory-oral or visual-manual.
Early language exposure is vital for all children, whether deaf or hearing. Research emphasizes that the early years are critical for language, cognitive, and social development. Newborn hearing screenings now common in hospitals provide an opportunity for early identification of hearing loss. This early detection allows parents to explore communication options and begin their child’s language journey as soon as possible. This underscores the universal importance of early language access, regardless of the language modality – spoken or signed. When we compare the developmental needs of deaf and hearing children, we find a shared requirement for early and rich linguistic input to reach their full potential.
Researching ASL: Unlocking Language Universals
The study of ASL provides valuable insights into the nature of language itself. Researchers investigate ASL’s grammar, acquisition, and development to better understand the fundamental principles of human language. One fascinating area of research compares brain activity during sign and spoken language processing, revealing that similar brain regions are engaged when constructing complex phrases, regardless of modality. This suggests a shared neural basis for language, whether signed or spoken. Further research into ASL and emerging sign languages in isolated communities helps us understand the essential elements of natural language and the complex interplay between innate language abilities and environmental factors. By comparing different language systems, including ASL, scientists can gain a deeper understanding of the universal aspects of human language and its neurobiological foundations.
For those seeking more information about American Sign Language, numerous resources are available. Organizations dedicated to hearing, balance, taste, smell, voice, speech, and language can provide further insights and support. Exploring ASL opens a window into the diversity of human communication and highlights the richness and complexity of visual languages.
