Baby sign language: A guide for the science-minded parent

© 2022 Gwen Dewar, Ph.D., all rights reserved

What is "baby sign language"?

The term is a fleck misleading, since information technology doesn't refer to a genuine language. A true language has syntax, a grammatical structure. It has native speakers who converse fluently with each other.

By dissimilarity, baby sign language, besides known equally baby signing, unremarkably refers to the deed of communicating with babies using a modest number of symbolic gestures.

Parents talk to their babies in the usual way – by speaking words – merely they also make use of these signs. For instance, a mother might inquire, "Do y'all want something to potable?" while making the sign for "drinkable."

Does babe sign linguistic communication piece of work?

The short answer is yes, it works — in the sense that babies can acquire to translate and apply signs. As I note below, research suggests that many babies can commencement producing signs by the time they are 8-10 months of age.

But the same can be said for spoken words, and, equally nosotros'll see, it's not articulate that instruction babies to sign gives them whatever special, long-term advantages.

What signs do people utilise?

It depends. In some cases, families might co-opt the gestures that arise spontaneously during everyday communication.

For example, you and your baby encounter a butterfly, so y'all flap your hands every bit y'all say the word aloud. Or yous discover that your baby waves her paw dismissively when she doesn't want something, as if she is trying to push it away.

Such gestures represent a kind of pantomime. You're acting out what you're trying to say.

Merely people oft apply the term "baby sign language" to refer to something different: didactics babies a prepare of signs provided by charts, books, or videos. And many of these signs lack the pantomime element.

Every bit Lorraine Howard and Gwyneth Doherty-Sneddon (2014) notation, at that place has been a tendency for commercial baby language programs to borrow signs from languages for the deaf, like American Sign Language (ASL).

Some of these accept the quality of iconicity. Their class resembles the idea they correspond.

The ASL sign for "potable," for example, looks like you lot're holding a loving cup to your mouth:

---

But other signs arenot iconic. You can see this here, in the signs for "play," "hurt," and "mother," all adapted from ASL:

The mapping of the gestures to their meanings is arbitrary, just as information technology is for most spoken words.

Does it matter if a sign is iconic (pantomime-like) or arbitrary?

Enquiry suggests that it does. As long as y'all possess the necessary background information (that people drink from cups), you are going to find it easy to connect the sign (the ASL gesture for "beverage") with the idea (drinking). And that will aid you lot learn and remember the sign going forward.

Studies confirm that babies tend to learn iconic signs more readily than arbitrary ones (Thompson et al 2012).

Then should you teach your baby signs? What are the benefits of babe sign language?

Teaching a infant to communicate using gestures can be exciting and fun. It's an opportunity to watch your baby think and larn.

The process might encourage you to pay closer attention to your infant'southward attempts to communicate. It might help you appreciate the challenges your baby faces when trying to decipher language.

These are skilful things, and for some parents, they are reason enough to endeavour baby signing.

But what about other reasons — developmental reasons?

Some advocates claim that baby signing programs have long-term cerebral benefits.

They merits that babies taught to sign will amass larger spoken vocabularies, and even develop higher IQs.

Others take claimed that signing has important emotional benefits.

According to this statement, babies learn signs more than hands than they learn words. As a result, they communicate more effectively at an earlier historic period. Their parents empathize them better, reducing frustration and stress.

Does the enquiry support these claims?

Not actually. But it depends on what you hateful by baby-signing.

If by "baby signing" you lot mean "didactics babies signs derived from ASL or other languages," then there's no compelling prove of long-term advantages.

Just if you're thinking of the more spontaneous, pantomime utilize of gesture, that'south a different story. In that location is proficient testify suggesting that easy-to-decipher, iconic gesturing tin can help babies larn.

To come across what I hateful, let's take a closer look at the enquiry.

Practise infant signing programs boost long-term cognitive skills?

Overall, the show is lacking.

The very first studies hinted that infant sign language training could be at least somewhat advantageous, but simply for a brief time period (Acredolo and Goodwyn 1988; Goodwyn et al 2000).

In these studies, Linda Acredolo and Susan Goodwyn instructed parents to use baby signs with their infants. So the researchers tracked the children across 6 fourth dimension points, up to the age of 36 months.

When the children's linguistic communication skills were tested at each time point, the researchers establish that babies taught signs were sometimes a scrap more advanced than babies in a control group.

For instance, the signing children seemed to possess larger receptive vocabularies. They recognized more words.

Just the effect was weak, and detected only for a couple of time points during the centre of the study.

For the last 2 time points, when babies were 30 months and 36 months old, there were no statistically significant differences between groups (Goodwyn et al 2000).

In other words, there was no show that babies benefited in a lastingway.

And more recent studies — using stringent controls — have also failed to find whatsoever long-term vocabulary advantage for babies taught to sign (Johnston et al 2005; Kirk et al 2012; Fitzpatrick et al 2014; Seal and DePaolis 2014).

For example, Elizabeth Kirk and her colleagues (2012) randomly assigned 20 mothers to supplement their speech with symbolic gestures of baby sign linguistic communication.

The babies were tracked from 8 months to 20 months of age, and showed no linguistic benefits compared to babies in a control group.

And IQ?

Although some advocates have claimed that baby sign language preparation boosts a child's IQ, the relevant enquiry has yet to appear in any peer-reviewed journal. On this question, it's safe to say that the jury is even so out.

What about enabling better advice during infancy? Is it true that babies tin can sign before they can speak?

This is an interesting idea, and it has been championed by advocates of infant signing programs.

The proposal is that babies are capable of communicating via sign language months earlier they are set up to communicate with spoken language.

Is at that place compelling scientific testify for this merits? One time once again, the answer is no.

The all-time prove bachelor on the question comes from a few, small studies of children raised to sign from birth. For example, ii of the most relevant studies feature samples of fewer than a dozen children for a given historic period range.

In these studies, the boilerplate timing of first signed words appears to be a fleck younger than the average timing observed for children learning spoken language.

But there is large problem. The sample sizes are only too small to depict whatever firm conclusions.

For example, one long-term study (tracking the same babies from an early age) featured only 11 infants (Bonvillian et al 1983).

Some other study relies on data collected from just a few individuals each age group — for instance, merely five individuals between the ages of 12 and thirteen months (Anderson and Reilly 2002).

When nosotros utilize such small samples, we run a loftier risk of getting results that are skewed: It's relatively easy to end up with a group of individuals who aren't representative of the population as a whole.

And this is peculiarly true when there is a lot of individual variation, as is the instance for the timing of language product. For instance, at 13 months of age, it's normal for some children to produce as few as 4 words, while others might produce more than than 80.

What if by chance your small sample includes mostly early bloomers? Or tardily bloomers?

Finally, there are methodological issues to be solved. Nosotros need to make sure we utilise like standards when we count signs and spoken words, and different studies aren't always comparable in this respect.

So we nonetheless have a long way to go earlier we can answer this question. Read more about it in this Parenting Science commodity. 

Only surely there are situations where signing is easier than speaking?

I recollect that's very probable. For instance, the ASL sign for "spider" looks a lot like a spider. It's iconic, which may brand it easier for babies to decipher. And it might exist easier for babies to produce the gesture than to speak the English language word, "spider," which includes tricky elements, like the composite consonant "sp."

The same might be said for the ASL signs for "elephant" and "deer."

But most ASL signs aren't iconic, and, every bit I explicate opens in a new windowhere, some gestures tin exist pretty hard for babies to reproduce — just as some spoken words tin can be hard to pronounce.

And then it'south unlikely that a baby is going to find 1 mode of advice (signing or speaking) easier across the board.

And the social and emotional benefits? Is there testify that baby signing reduces frustration or stress?

Individual families might experience benefits. But without controlled studies, it'south hard to know if it's really learning to sign that makes the difference.

It's also hard to know if the effect is full general – something near families would experience if they tried it.

To appointment, claims almost stress aren't well-supported. One written report found that parents enrolled in a signing course felt less stressed subsequently, but this study didn't measure parents' stress levels earlier the report began, so nosotros can't depict conclusions (Góngora and Farkas 2009).

Nevertheless, in that location are hints that signing may help some parents become more attuned to what their babies are thinking.

In the study led by Elizabeth Kirk, the researchers found that mothers who had been instructed to apply baby signs behaved differently than mothers in the control grouping. The signing mothers tended to be more responsive to their babies' nonverbal cues, and they were more than likely to encourage independent exploration (Kirk et al 2012).

So perhaps babe signing encourages parents to pay extra attention when they communicate. Considering they are consciously trying to teach signs, they are more than likely to scrutinize their babies' nonverbal signals.

Every bit a outcome, some parents might become meliorate babe "mind-readers" than they might otherwise have been, and that's a skillful thing. Being tuned into your baby'southward thoughts and feelings helps your baby acquire faster.

But of form parents don't demand to participate in a baby sign language programme to achieve these effects. The important matter is tuning into your baby, and figuring out what he or she wants.

And this begs the question: Does teaching your baby signs (from ASL or other languages) necessarily give you lot more than insight into what your infant wants?

Families tin communicate quite successfully without using formal "infant signs"

For instance, consider this snapshot of a baby making the sign for "more," borrowed from ASL.

Information technology's a perfectly useful sign, and many babies have learned it. Merely what happens if you don't teach your baby this sign?

Will your babe be incapable of letting you know that he wants more than applesauce? Volition your baby somehow neglect to get across the message that she wants to play another round of peek-a-boo?

When parents pay attention to their babies — and engage them in conversation, one-on-1 — they learn to read their babies' cues.

A babe might pat the table when he wants more absurdity. A baby might reach out and grinning when she wants to play with you. They aren't signs borrowed from a language like ASL, only, in context, their significant is articulate.

When nosotros respond appropriately to these spontaneous gestures, we are engaged in successful communication, and nosotros are helping our babies build the social skills they need to master language.

That doesn't mean in that location is no reason to teach formal signs. Yous might detect that some signs are helpful — that they allow for communication that is otherwise difficult for your babe.

But it's wrong to think of formal signs equally the merely gestures that matter. From the very beginnings of humanity, parents and babies have communicated by gesture. And inquiry suggests that gestures thing. A lot!

In fact, this is so important, it's worth considering in more item. Whether or not you lot  decide to teach your baby sign linguistic communication, you should cover the employ of gestures when you communicate.

Why everyday gestures can have a big touch on your babe'due south development

1. Our nonverbal cues can help babies learn linguistic communication

Imagine I stranded you in the center of a remote, isolated nation. You don't speak the local language, and the locals don't recognize any of your words. What would you do?

Very rapidly, you'd resort to pantomime. And every bit you lot tried to learn the language, yous'd soon appreciate that some people are a lot more helpful than others.

It isn't just that they're friendlier. Some people just seem to accept a better knack for not-verbal cues. They follow your gaze, and comment on what y'all're looking at. They point at the things they are talking about.

They utilize their hands and facial expressions to act out some of the things they are trying to say. And they're really good at information technology. When they talk, information technology'due south easier to figure out what they mean.

Researchers call this power "referential transparency," and it helps babies too every bit adults. The testify?

Erica Cartmill and her colleagues (2013) made video recordings of existent-life conversations betwixt 50 parents and their infants – first when the babies were 14 months onetime, and again when they are eighteen months erstwhile.

And so, for each parent-kid pair, the researchers selected brief vignettes – verbal interactions where the parent was using a concrete noun (like the discussion "brawl").

The researchers muted the soundtrack of each vignette, and inserted a beeping noise every time the parent uttered the target discussion. Next, they showed the resulting video clips to more than 200 adult volunteers.

They asked the volunteers to guess what the parents were talking most. When you lot hear the beep, what give-and-take practise you lot recall the parent is proverb?

The researchers were pretty tough graders. They didn't, for example, count guesses every bit right if they were too general (similar guessing "toy" when the correct answer was "teddy deport").

Nor did they requite volunteers credit for guesses that were too specific (guessing "finger" when the correct answer was "hand"). They too tried to eliminate vignettes where it was possible for volunteers to read the parents' lips.

So the test wasn't piece of cake, and it might give us an idea of how challenging information technology is for babies to decipher unfamiliar words. The outcome?

It turns out at that place was a lot of variation betwixt parents. Some parents spoke with referential transparency but 5% of the time. Others were more similar expert foreign linguistic communication teachers, making their meanings clear upward to 38% of the time.

And — here's the part with implications for the long-term — there were links between a parent's referential transparency score and her child's vocabulary 3 years later on.

Babies who had more "transparent" parents tested with larger vocabularies when they were four and half years old.

The link remained pregnant even after controlling for the babies' vocabularies at the beginning of the report. And there were other interesting points too.

Although the sheer number of works spoken by parents predicted a child'southward vocabulary, information technology was high-quality, transparent communication that mattered most.

And while researchers replicated a well-known finding – that parents of higher socioeconomic condition (SES) utilize more than words with their kids – there were no links between SES and referential transparency. Parents of high SES were no more probable than other parents to speak to their babies in a highly transparent mode.

What do we make of these results?

We can't be certain that referential transparency caused larger vocabularies. Maybe parents who scored high on referential transparency did and so because they possessed a heritable trait – 1 they passed on to their kids – that makes people both meliorate communicators and meliorate exact learners.

But remember: Parents with loftier referential transparency were easier for developed volunteers to empathise, and these adults were unrelated to the parents.

So it isn't hard to imagine how referential transparency could lead to long-term linguistic communication gains. And other inquiry suggests that nosotros tin can help our babies by existence responsive to our babies' spontaneous gestures.

For case, consider the importance of pointing.

2. Babies learn words faster when nosotros label the things they point at

Near babies begin pointing between 9 and 12 months, and this can mark a major quantum in communication.

By pointing, babies can brand requests (e.yard., "Give me that toy"). They can also ask questions ("What is that?") and make comments ("Look at that!").

Only the affect of this communicative quantum depends on our own behavior. Are nosotros paying attention? Do we answer appropriately?

Equally psychologists Jana Iverson and Susan Goldin-Meadow have noted, a baby who points at a new object might prompt her parent to label and describe the object.

If the parent responds this way, the baby gets data at just the right moment—when she is curious and attentive. And that could have large implications for learning (Iverson and Goldin-Meadow 2005).

Experiments have confirmed the effect: Babies are quicker to larn the name of an object if they initiate a "lesson" by pointing. And if the adult tries to initiate — by labeling an object that the baby didn't point at? So there is no special learning effect (Lucca et al 2018).

So there's skilful reason to think that gestures touch learning. Only the trick is to emphasize piece of cake-to-decipher gestures.

Nosotros want to be like that those linguistic communication tutors in the remote, far-off country – the ones who respond to other people's requests for information, and who have a knack for supplementing speech with easy-to-empathise pantomime.

Does this mean that abstract, non-iconic signs pose a problem? Can baby sign languagedelay speech evolution?

That's a reasonable question, given that baby signing programs characteristic signs that are non-iconic. Could the difficulty of learning such signs exist a roadblock?

Studies haven't found that babies trained to utilize signs suffer any disadvantages.

So if you and your babe relish learning and using signs, you shouldn't worry that y'all're putting your baby at take chances for a spoken language delay. In essence, you're just teaching your baby extra vocabulary — vocabulary borrowed from a second language.

Yet, information technology's helpful to remember thaticonic gestures are easier for your babe to figure out.

For example, in ane experimental report, fifteen-month-old toddlers were relatively quick to learn the proper name of a new object when the adults gestured in an illustrative, pantomime-like fashion.

The toddlers were less likely to learn the name for an object when the spoken word was paired with an capricious (non-representational) gesture (Puccini and Liszkowski 2012).

What's the takeaway?

Non-verbal communication is crucial for linguistic communication development. Gestures tin provide babies with important information, and assistance them decipher your pregnant.

But not all gestures are every bit helpful. Research suggests that the most effective approach is

1. to pay attention to our babies, and answer appropriately to their spontaneous attempts to gesture and enunciate; and
2. to communicate with babies using a combination of speech andtransparent gestures — like pantomime and pointing.

In improver, I suspect information technology's beneficial to build on those signs and gestures that yous and your baby spontaneouslyinvent. They already have meaning to your infant, and they are probably easier for your infant to remember.

This doesn't hateful you lot shouldn't too teach your infant sign language, including some arbitrary, not-iconic signs. It can be fun and interesting, and your child might cease up learning signs that are very useful.

Just to help your baby learn, it makes sense to emphasize gestures that are like shooting fish in a barrel to decipher, and which have personal meaning to your infant.

---

Tips for educational activity baby sign language

Whether you opt for the spontaneous, do-it-yourself approach, or you want to teach your babe gestures derived from real sign languages, keep the following tips in mind.

1. You tin start early.

Babies begin learning about language from the very beginning. They overhear their mothers' voices in the womb, and they are capable of recognizing their mother'southward native linguistic communication – distinguishing it from a foreign language – at nascency.

Over the following months, their brains sort through all the linguistic communication they encounter, and they start to fissure the lawmaking. And by the time they are half dozen months onetime, babies evidence an understanding of many everyday words – similar "mama," "bottle," and "nose."

Many babies this historic period are also blathering – repeating speech syllables like "ma ma ma" and "ba ba ba."

If a six-month-old babe says "ba ba" after you give her a bottle, could it be that she'southward trying to say the give-and-take "canteen"? If an infant sees his mother and says "mama," is he calling her by proper name?

Information technology's entirely possible. And as noted to a higher place, research suggests that many babies are speaking their first words by the age of 10 months. (Read more virtually it in my commodity, " opens in a new windowWhen do babies speak their beginning words?")

So we might await that babies are ready to discover and learn about signs at an early historic period — even earlier they are 6 months old.

2. Introduce signs naturally, equally a office of everyday conversation, and don't try to "drill" babies.

Babies learn words and signs by being repeatedly exposed to them, and past using them in real conversations. So let your signs come up naturally, and avoid turning these episodes into parent-driven lessons. Recall the experiments most pointing. Babies acquire when they're the ones who initiate.

iii. Proceed in mind that it'south normal for babies to be less than competent. Don't pretend you can't empathise your baby simply because his or her signs don't lucifer the model!

Only a baby's offset attempt to say "bottle" falls short ("ba ba,") his or her early attempts to gesture will likely be less than perfect.

Infant sign linguistic communication instructors call these attempts "sign approximations," and they recommend that yous run with them. In some cases, your infant might lack the manual dexterity to form the correct version of the sign.

Pretending that your infant didn't really communicate effectively to you — because your baby's gesture isn't exactly what you want — is counterproductive. Don't forget: Babies develop ameliorate language skills when their parents are tuned in and helpful!

More reading

You can read more about the timing of signing and speaking in opens in a new windowthis commodity. I review the evidence, and accost misconceptions about baby sign language.

For more than data nearly communicating with babies, see my review of fascinating inquiry about the opens in a new windowfurnishings of centre contact on infants. Information technology discusses how shared gaze primes your baby's brain for communication and language-learning.

In addition, come across opens in a new windowthis Parenting Science commodity about how certain aspects of babe-directed speech assistance babies learn language.

Interested in gesture? You should be! Research suggests that gesture does more than than help babies learn language. It tin can as well assist kids grasp mathematical concepts, and more. Read about it in my commodity, opens in a new window"The Science of gestures."

---

References: Infant sign language

Acredolo, LP and Goodwyn SW. 1988. Symbolic gesturing in normal infants. Child Development 59: 450-466.

Acredolo Fifty and Goodwyn Due south. 1998. Baby Signs. Chicago: Contemporary Books.

Anderson D and Reilly J. 2002. The MacArthur Communicative Development Inventory: Normative data for American Sign Language. Journal of Deaf Studies and Deafened Educational activity 7: 83–106

Bonvillian JD, Orlansky MD, Novack LL. 1983. Developmental milestones: sign language conquering and motor development. Child Dev. 54(6):1435-45.

Cartmill EA, Armstrong BF 3rd, Gleitman LR, Goldin-Meadow S, Medina TN, Trueswell JC. 2013. Quality of early on parent input predicts child vocabulary 3 years later. Proc Natl Acad Sci Us  110(28):11278-83.

Crais E, Douglas DD, and Campbell CC. 2004. The intersection of the development of gestures and intentionality. J Spoken communication Lang Hear Res. 47(3):678-94.

Fenson L, Dale PS, Reznick JS, Bates East, Thal DJ, Pethick SJ. 1994. Variability in early on communicative development. Monogr Soc Res Kid Dev. 59(5):one-173.

Fitzpatrick EM, Thibert J, Grandpierre V, and Johnston JC. 2014. How handy are baby signs? A systematic review of the impact of gestural communication on typically developing, hearing infants under the age of 36 months. Offset Language. 34 (6): 486–509.

Goodwyn SW, Acredolo LP, and Brown C. 2000. Touch of symbolic gesturing on early linguistic communication development. Journal of Nonverbal Behavior. 24: 81-103.

Howard L and Doherty-Sneddon Chiliad. 2014. How HANDy are baby signs? A commentary on a systematic review of the touch on of gestural communication on typically developing, hearing infants nether the age of 36 months. First Language 34(6):510-515

Iverson JM and Goldin-Meadow Southward. 2005. Gesture paves the way for language evolution. Psychological Science 16(5): 367-371.

Iverson, J.M., Capirci, O., Volterra, V., & Goldin-Meadow, S. (in press). Learning to talk in a gesture-rich earth: Early on communication of Italian vs. American children. Get-go Language.

Johnston JC, Durieux-Smith A and Flower K. 2005. Teaching gestural signs to infants to advance child development: A review of the evidence. Commencement Linguistic communication 25(2): 235-251.

Kirk E, Howlett N, Pine KJ, Fletcher BC. 2013. To Sign or Not to Sign? The Impact of Encouraging Infants to Gesture on Infant Language and Maternal Listen-Mindedness. Child Dev. 84(two):574-90.

Lucca K and Wilbourn MP. 2018. Communicating to Learn: Infants' Pointing Gestures Result in Optimal Learning. Child Dev.  89(iii):941-960.

Mayor J and Plunkett Chiliad. 2011. A statistical approximate of infant and toddler vocabulary size from CDI assay. Developmental Science 14(4): 769-85.

Meins East, Fernyhough C, Fradley E, and Tuckey M. 2001. Rethinking maternal sensitivity: Mothers' comments on infants' mental processes predict security of zipper at 12 months. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry and Allied Discipline 42: 637-648.

Meyer RP. 2016. Sign language acquisition. Oxford Handbooks Online. DOI: x.1093/oxfordhb/9780199935345.013.19

Oller DK. 2000. The emergence of the speech capacity. Lawrence Erlbaum.

Petitto LA. 1988. "Language" in the prelinguistic child. In F. S. Kessel (ed.), The evolution of linguistic communication and language researchers: Essays in laurels of Roger Chocolate-brown (pp. 187–221). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

Petitto LA and Marentette PF. 1991. Blathering in the manual style: Evidence for the ontogeny of language. Science 251: 1493-1496.

Puccini D and Liszkowski U. 2012. fifteen-Month-Old Infants Fast Map Words but Not Representational Gestures of Multimodal Labels. Front Psychol. 2012;3:101. Epub 2022 Apr 3.

Seal BC and DePaolis RA. 2014. Manual Action and Onset of First Words in Babies Exposed and Not Exposed to Baby Signing. Sign Linguistic communication Studies fourteen(4): 444-465.

Thompson R, Vinson DP, Woll B, and Vigliocco G. 2012. The road to language learning is iconic: Show from British Sign Language. Psychological Science 23: 1443–1448

title image of gesturing baby boy and father by David R Tribble / wikimedia eatables

image of pointing infant on the lap of his father by opens in a new windowQuinn Dombrowski / flickr

image of infant signs by opens in a new windowDr. Michael Fetters, University of Michigan

image of mother holding gesturing, vocalizing baby by opens in a new windowLindsay Shaver/flickr

image of boy signing for more by opens in a new windowJoe Szilagyi/flickr

paradigm of mother in park reaching towards toddler by opens in a new windowBob B Chocolate-brown/flickr

Portions of this text appeared in an earlier version of the article by the same name. In add-on, some of the sentences virtually Cartmill's study original appeared in a web log postal service for BabyCenter.

Content last modified one/2019

alexanderbrestiong79.blogspot.com

Source: https://parentingscience.com/baby-sign-language/

Share this post