Babies learn sign language before they learn to talk, So....

[Nuzzolese]

Two of my friends have deaf family members, and both of them have explained that the children (both hearing and nonhearing) learn to sign much earlier than they learn to talk. I mean that they learn to sign about the same time they are learning to make audible sounds, (which is about the normal age for a kid learning to babble and babytalk) but that the signing is learned at a much faster rate.

In one family, the Montgomerys, both parents are hearing impaired but their kids can hear. The kids learned to talk at a normal rate. They were taken to classes to help them learn to talk since their parents (not being able to hear) couldn't do well at that. In the other family, the Vespas, both parents can hear but the child is deaf, so they went to classes to learn to sign. In both families, the babies could/can sign for 'mommy' and 'milk' and words like that, even before they know the words or learned to sound them.

So if a kid can link a signifier with something they want to communicate, that is amazing because it means the kids understand connections and cause and effect and stuff, before they're developmentally able to form words. Wouldn't it be helpful if there was something they knew how to do to communicate it, other than just fussing? Something specific that would communicate just what they want?

I'm thinking that the development of language comes out of a need to communicate, once the child is cognitive of wanting to communicate something, and understanding how to get something. But spoken language is too complicated for their little mouths. If a baby is capable of signing with their hands before they can talk, then why don't we teach all kids sign language? Expose them to it as babies and it gives them a tool they can use in preparation for something harder, sort of like training wheels for language. Wouldn't it be great to be able to sign, even if everyone could hear? Think of the shortcuts!



EDIT: I plan to look more into this and see if there have been any actual behavioral studies done on this subject. I can't assume, based on two families' reports, that this is a universal phenomenon for deaf children and children in deaf households.

[bigblu89]

Yeah, my daughter learned how to sign "More Please" way before she knew how to actually say the words.

I think it's easier for them to mimmick actions rather than sounds.

[Schmeltz]

One of the findings that came out of the studies of feral children, raised in settings without exposure to any language and then taught to speak much later in life, was that there appears to be a threshold past which human beings are unable to develop their understanding of language if they aren't exposed to it during their formative years. If I recall correctly this barrier was associated with failures to comprehend and employ syntax and other more advanced linguistic concepts, but there was some debate about whether that was necessarily true for everybody or if it might vary from person to person. It certainly suggests, however, that humans have an instinctive or reflexive capacity for abstract thought and physiological mimcry quite separate from the evolution of language, and demonstrates the extent to which language and its use are cultural rather than strictly natural behaviours.

[marsdaddy]

We taught Mookie to to sign at around age one and he was pretty good at it. We read a book and were consistent with him. There is even a baby version of signing, that's a bit easier to learn. He kept it up for a while because they also taught it at his school the last 2 years.

Mateo has known how to sign for about 6 months now, except he uses the sign for helicopter instead of more. We haven't been nearly as consistent with him. He knows how to sign more -- well, actually, helicopter -- but doesn't know how to sign all done. Problematic, when you think about it. Instead, he's started to sound out words -- lala for leche, bball for baseball, side for outside, and he says shoes pretty clearly.

Another difference between the two of them is Mookie's first words were "Hi Dadda" and Mateo's were either Gato or Momma.

[ms.peachy]

If a baby is capable of signing with their hands before they can talk, then why don't we teach all kids sign language? Expose them to it as babies and it gives them a tool they can use in preparation for something harder, sort of like training wheels for language.

I can't speak for every parent of an infant/toddler, but in my area, this is pretty much already happening. There are free or low-cost baby signing classes offered in abundance, there are DVDs and books available, there are TV programs with signing characters. Mattie's carers at her nursery use baby signing with all of the under-2's. Baby signs do tend to be 'approximations' - they lack the motor control to do them very specifically, but as a parent or carer you get to recognise what they are attempting to say. Though, I would point out, if you are an attentive parent, you will get to recognise what your baby's gestures mean anyway - but using 'official' signs does then give the two of you an additional shared platform for communication. So, I think baby signing is a good thing, and it would be nice for all parents to have the opportunity to try it if they want, BUT I would hate to see it become just one more thing to beat parents over the head with and make them feel bad about if they just can't for whatever reason incorporate it into their lives.

[hellojello]

Whilst I understand that many of these programs aimed at stimulating early learning and or communication techniques in children have significantly expedited the developmental abilities of the children involved, I wonder if babies that go to signing programs and or any sort of early learning/ mental stimulation programs' actually end up significantly more 'intelligent' and or more stable and well balanced in society, than, the general community who have not attended such programs in the long term [as adults]?

[Yeti]

Of course babies learn sign language before they can talk. If you could not speak and you were hungry you would be walking around to everyone on the street making a spoon motion to your mouth. How do you think the choke sign was invented? Some poor bastard was choking on a chicken bone and he realized that he could not say I am a stupid fucker! I ate a bone! So he invented the redface hands to the throat sign.

[abcdefz]

I'm still curious about this "co-signing a loan" thing.

[Nuzzolese]

One of the findings that came out of the studies of feral children, raised in settings without exposure to any language and then taught to speak much later in life, was that there appears to be a threshold past which human beings are unable to develop their understanding of language if they aren't exposed to it during their formative years. If I recall correctly this barrier was associated with failures to comprehend and employ syntax and other more advanced linguistic concepts, but there was some debate about whether that was necessarily true for everybody or if it might vary from person to person. It certainly suggests, however, that humans have an instinctive or reflexive capacity for abstract thought and physiological mimcry quite separate from the evolution of language, and demonstrates the extent to which language and its use are cultural rather than strictly natural behaviours.

I have read similar things, and I guess I would consider sign language as a parallel to spoken language insofar as you have to learn it (if no other form of language) at a certain point in life, or else you won't learn any language at all.

I wonder, though, if what babies are doing with sign language is only the same thing you teach animals to do, through reward training. And although it looks like they're communicating at an advanced level, they're really just mimicing something they've been trained to do because it gets them consistent responses.

Then again, that's how people first learn to talk anyway. It starts with trial and error and consistent responses and mimicry and only later as our brains develop, do we move on to complex pattern-recognition and creative thinking.

Kids learn words maybe because they babble and gugle until they finally say something that gets a big response from people around them. If a kid just made sounds and no one ever gave him a rewarding response, would he just stop making sounds alogether?

[Nuzzolese]

I can't speak for every parent of an infant/toddler, but in my area, this is pretty much already happening. There are free or low-cost baby signing classes offered in abundance, there are DVDs and books available, there are TV programs with signing characters. Mattie's carers at her nursery use baby signing with all of the under-2's. Baby signs do tend to be 'approximations' - they lack the motor control to do them very specifically, but as a parent or carer you get to recognise what they are attempting to say. Though, I would point out, if you are an attentive parent, you will get to recognise what your baby's gestures mean anyway - but using 'official' signs does then give the two of you an additional shared platform for communication. So, I think baby signing is a good thing, and it would be nice for all parents to have the opportunity to try it if they want, BUT I would hate to see it become just one more thing to beat parents over the head with and make them feel bad about if they just can't for whatever reason incorporate it into their lives.


Aww, I didn't even think of that, of putting more pressure on parents. It makes me think of Baby Boom and those classes she took Elizabeth to, where they were learning about politicians and art.

[Nuzzolese]

Whilst I understand that many of these programs aimed at stimulating early learning and or communication techniques in children have significantly expedited the developmental abilities of the children involved, I wonder if babies that go to signing programs and or any sort of early learning/ mental stimulation programs' actually end up significantly more 'intelligent' and or more stable and well balanced in society, than, the general community who have not attended such programs in the long term [as adults]?


From what I've read, I don't think so. It seems to make a difference early on but not later in life at all.

[Nuzzolese]

Of course babies learn sign language before they can talk. If you could not speak and you were hungry you would be walking around to everyone on the street making a spoon motion to your mouth. How do you think the choke sign was invented? Some poor bastard was choking on a chicken bone and he realized that he could not say I am a stupid fucker! I ate a bone! So he invented the redface hands to the throat sign.

Why do you think babies would even be able to imagine the sign for eating? What make syou think they'd be able to remember anything like that? I was amazed that they were. I guess I didn't realize how many babies knew instincively to make a spoon motion to their mouths.

[hellojello]

Apparently at around 18 months babies understand about 80% more than what they can communicate which is why they get frustrated and demand attention while adults are having conversations (that exclude the children). Keeping this in mind, it would perhaps be beneficial for children to learn other methods of communicating as their vocal chords simply aren't developed enough to form words. If children don't really see a need to talk, I don't believe the necessarily will. I know this kid that didn't speak until he was around 4 years old. He didn't seem to feel the need to since pointing seemed to satisfy his needs. He is 16 or 17 now and speaks fine. Although he is a quiet type. Coincidence? Maybe, maybe not.
I also read about a girl who had an entirely deaf family. Until she was 5 years old it was assumed she was deaf too, however they discovered then that she wasn't when she was sent to a school for deaf children. It's hard to know whether she never spoke before that point because she never heard any words, or if she never spoke because sign language was a completely effective means of communication, or if she even began speaking/making noises, then experiencing no reward as a baby, stopped all together as it was completely foriegn to the household.
Thinking about it now I wish the article went into more detail abuot that aspect of the story.

[Nuzzolese]

Yeah, I wonder if she learned to speak well as an adult.

[cosmo105]

From what I've read, I don't think so. It seems to make a difference early on but not later in life at all.

programs like Head Start were found to have no lasting effects after a certain age level (differences in kids with/without it leveled off after about 3rd grade) so they decided to not stop doing the programs at a certain age but to keep them going throughout all of the kid's education (y)

my nephew has had a lot of speech difficulty, which my niece later picked up from him, but signing helped him communicate so much better. he's made great improvements and still uses signs here and there when he can't get across what he's trying to say. i was always very impressed with his ability to use it.

[hellojello]

Yeah, I wonder if she learned to speak well as an adult.

I don't see why not, she's deaf, not spastic.

[Yeti]

Why do you think babies would even be able to imagine the sign for eating? What make syou think they'd be able to remember anything like that? I was amazed that they were. I guess I didn't realize how many babies knew instincively to make a spoon motion to their mouths.


I was being a smartass as usual. My wife bought a book on signing but I just babble with my son. It is a good thing to teach infants and toddlers any form of communication. I have been teaching Aiden morse code by tapping his Elmo on a drum.

[Nuzzolese]

I don't see why not, she's deaf, not spastic.

But she didn't have anyone to teach her to talk until she was much older so, considering what you were saying earlier about that important learning time in children...YOU'RE spastic!

[hellojello]

But she didn't have anyone to teach her to talk until she was much older so, considering what you were saying earlier about that important learning time in children...YOU'RE spastic!

No I don't have cerebal palsy, which would inhibit one's speech ability. I think you misinterpreted what I was saying before, because I was actually challening the idea that early learning programs such as those you were describing have any real benefit later in life at all. This idea subsequently suggests that someone raised around a silent family for 5 years, yet encouraged to speak after that point, would have no problem whatsoever learning to speak, as children that have been denied the opportunity of early learning programs, yet attend school from 5 with the rest of the children aren't proven to be less intelligent that those that have been allowed that advantage of beginning their education earlier.

[Nuzzolese]

She didn't have a head start but she had a late start. Kids at 5 know how to talk quite a bit, I guess I confused your post with the one by ther person who was talking about feral children. Sorry to have offended you about the cerebral palsy thing. I was JOKE-ING. Guess it didn't translate.

[marsdaddy]

Does our Hatfield and McCoy relationship continue or did I simply bore you?

[Loppfessor]

They do that in a lot of day cares now...my ex's baby learned all kinds of crap before she could talk. It was pretty cool

[paul jones]

I wonder if any of Ace Of Base have read this or can do sign language?

deaf people are lucky not to be able to hear Ace Of Base which is a good thing probably(y)

[BangkokB]

FACT: My wife is deaf. Everytime I ask her to get me a beer she can't hear me. I have found that yelling works or my Mr. Microphone ""Hey, good looking, I'll be back to pick you up later. And since your in the kitchen how bout opening that fridge and bringing me an ice cold beer" Sometimes the neighbors help out if I ask long and loud enough

Sure it's a strain. But that's the cross that I have to bear

[Alli]

we should teach babies telepathy. Now that would impress me.

[Documad]

Kids learn words maybe because they babble and gugle until they finally say something that gets a big response from people around them. If a kid just made sounds and no one ever gave him a rewarding response, would he just stop making sounds alogether?

Yes, he probably would quit making sounds.

Babies don't smile and laugh because they are having fun. Babies smile and laugh because they crave positive attention and they learn early on that they get more attention if they smile and laugh. If you don't react to a baby's smile, the baby will quit smiling.


I just read the book Tested (which is about No Child Left Behind and how elementary schools teach to the test instead of what kids need to grow into better people). Them mentioned in there how kids raised in poorer homes tend to have less positive interaction with parents before kindergarten than their middle class peers. This results in them having a much smaller vocabulary and picking up all the things middle class kids pick up naturally (like colors, names of animals, how to write their names). Poorer kids are apparently more likely to hear "shut up" than "let's talk about your day."