signing in hearing babies

[Kathy Hirsh-Pasek]

James, Sorry I could not get back to you sooner as I not only read, but
provided the "public" critique of the book. I won't give a long answer here
as Adele provided an excellent review.  I think signing can be a great idea
for young children because it offers another way for parents to communicate
with children and we all know that the more parents and children engage in
give-and-take conversations, the better it is for language growth.  I do not
really think that Garcia should claim that what he is teaching is any more
"sign language, " however, than it would be teaching French if I taught my
child the word "cafe."  Thus, my problem with the system is that is gives a
false premise by suggesting to parents that they would be teaching a child
sign language.  This  just isn't true.  I too, like Acredolo and Goodwyn's
book and strongly recommend that you take a look.  It is beautifully written
and the research backs them up in suggesting that there are real advantages
to having input in another language or language form --- even if all you
give is a little exposure.  Garcia's work is less "scientific"-- in fact it
is not really scientific at all.  Also, the signs that he recommends are out
of touch with  the literature on first words.  The words he recommends
teaching are iconic, but are not generally among the first that children use
 e.g. please, toilet, dirty, please, and sorry.  Hope this helps. Kathy
Hirsh-Pasek
----------
>From: James Russell <jr111 at cus.cam.ac.uk>
>To: info-childes at childes.psy.cmu.edu
>Subject: signing in hearing babies
>Date: Fri, Mar 24, 2000, 11:05 AM
>

>Recently there was a TV report in the UK on the work
>of Garcia, who teaches ASL to very young, hearing babies. The
>claim is that this releases the communicative floodgates and reveals
>symbolic competetence far ealier than previously reported -
>not to mention making the terrible 2s less terrible.
>
>A literature search has not revealed any published work
>on this. Any references or views would be gratefully
>received.
>
>James Russell
>
>
>