戻る
「早戻しボタン」を押すと検索画面に戻ります。 [閉じる]

コーパス検索結果 (１語後でソート)

通し番号をクリックするとPubMedの該当ページを表示します
1 acking for the known compared to the unknown sign language.
2 e they watched videos in a known and unknown sign language.
3  us understand the role of gesture in spoken/sign language.
4 spoken language and have not been exposed to sign language.
5  cortical coherence to visual information in sign language.
6 m two tasks-grasping and signing in American Sign Language.
7 ign Language of the Netherlands, and Turkish Sign Language.
8 imensions that are relevant for phonology in sign language.
9 he time-course of lexical access in American Sign Language.
10 nd meaning that may be a unique signature of sign language.
11 s underlying any natural language, including sign language.
12 act, symbolic actions-signs used in American Sign Language.
13  biological constraints appear in individual sign languages.
14  configurations (handshapes) used in natural sign languages.
15 ion have hindered the diachronic analysis of sign languages.
16 thods can help study regular form changes in sign languages.
17 should be considered a gestural component of sign languages.
18 t form part of the categorical properties of sign languages.
19 nd production, as well as between spoken and signed language.
20                Research on deaf children and sign language acquisition can broaden the G-M&B approach
21         Deaf participants, who used American Sign Language, activated bilateral auditory processing a
22 communication with great apes trained to use sign language and Augmented Interspecies Communication (
23 ights the utility of new technology to study sign language and gesture.
24 n of visual communication strategies such as sign language and speechreading.
25 y Western countries with the introduction of sign language and the establishment of residential schoo
26 f adults whose primary language was American Sign Language and were first immersed in it at ages rang
27 This study investigates cortical tracking of sign language and whether experience and knowledge of si
28 (2) event descriptions by users of different sign languages and hearing nonsigners exhibit marked sim
29  hearing bimodal bilinguals (Spanish-Spanish Sign Language) and unimodal bilinguals (Spanish/Basque).
30 rience (for example, exposure to a spoken or signed language) and innate abilities (for example, the
31 ngaged by linguistically structured content (sign language); and to assess whether sign language expe
32  these principles to novel signs in American Sign Language, and their capacity to do so depends on th
33 nd automatic analysis of natural gesture and sign language are discussed.
34  of deaf people are "just gestures," or that sign languages are "just like spoken languages" - the vi
35                                              Sign languages are naturally occurring languages.
36 ardization problem does not affect spoken or signed languages as much.
37 of input to homesigners, and (b) established sign languages, as these codified systems display the li
38            Signed languages such as American Sign Language (ASL) are natural languages that are forma
39 nts and are exposed to English, not American Sign Language (ASL) as their first language, most studie
40 ography (EEG) in fluent speakers of American Sign Language (ASL) as they watch videos in ASL.
41 quests by patients who are deaf for American Sign Language (ASL) interpretation at appointments when
42 75 diverse hand gestures, including American Sign Language (ASL) postures, a dataset of natural hand
43 the average STM capacity when using American Sign Language (ASL) rather than English is only 5 +/- 1
44 ntence processing in English and in American Sign Language (ASL) was characterized by employing funct
45                Deaf native users of American Sign Language (ASL) were presented signed sentences that
46 f subjects who were native users of American Sign Language (ASL), 25 hearing subjects with no knowled
47 nd adult (n = 36) fluent signers of American Sign Language (ASL), and characterize neural ToM respons
48 ogical structure (systematicity) of American Sign Language (ASL), and for comparison, two spoken lang
49 mensions: linguistic and meaningful American Sign Language (ASL), non-meaningful pseudo-ASL, meaningf
50 ynamic hand gestures, especially in American Sign Language (ASL).
51 /or use of a visuospatial language [American sign language (ASL)] on the organization of neural syste
52 t, and who were not exposed to a preexisting sign language because there was none available in their
53 ical (phonological) structure of the British Sign Language (BSL) signs for the objects, (2) the seman
54 roimaging study of the perception of British Sign Language (BSL), we explored these questions by meas
55 ining-related changes in learners of British sign language (BSL).
56            Nonsigners also show coherence to sign language, but entrainment at frontal sites is reduc
57 l hearing and between deaf users of American Sign Language, but laughter rarely intrudes on the phras
58 tic and phonological structure of spoken and signed languages, but languages may differ in the extent
59 uage and whether experience and knowledge of sign language can modulate the tracking.
60  not at-issue, whereas iconic enrichments in sign language can often be at-issue.
61        We find quasiperiodic fluctuations in sign language, characterized by lower frequencies than f
62 nerally, we propose that the use of space in sign languages comes in many flavours and may be both ca
63                                     How does sign language compare with gesture, on the one hand, and
64 liance on cross-modal sensory integration in sign language compared with spoken language.
65           The results demonstrated that even sign language constructions that appear on the surface t
66 sampled typical attention-getting sounds and sign language conversations between each of 4 originally
67 psky, the chimpanzee who was taught American Sign Language, does not show the expected productivity o
68 pants (male and female), who either acquired sign language early or late in life.
69                            Here we show that sign languages encode telicity in a seemingly universal
70  Furthermore, hearing signers, with the same sign language experience as the deaf participants, did n
71 ntent (sign language); and to assess whether sign language experience influences the neural systems u
72  these regions when deaf signers with infant sign language experience were compared with hearing spea
73           To investigate how hearing status, sign language experience, and task demands influence fun
74 uals with different auditory deprivation and sign language experience.
75  was associated with both hearing status and sign language experience.
76 stigated whether auditory deprivation and/or sign language exposure during development alters the mac
77  relative contributions of factors including sign language fluency, protracted practice, and neural p
78 c methods to study family structure among 19 sign languages from deaf communities worldwide.
79 view is to elucidate the relationships among sign language, gesture, and spoken language.
80 bjects for 24 static and 16 dynamic American sign language gestures for validating our system.
81                                        A new sign language has been created by deaf Nicaraguans over
82                                            A sign language has emerged among three generations of dea
83                                     Yet, new sign languages have emerged recently among deaf people b
84                          Naturally occurring sign languages, however, often appear to conflate form a
85                             Semantic work on sign language iconicity suggests, as do Goldin-Meadow &
86 on of auditory deprivation and the extent of sign language immersion.
87 icited by spoken British English and British Sign Language in hearing early, sign-speech bilinguals.
88 phical narratives in English and in American Sign Language in hearing subjects who were native users
89 rts of deaf signers who acquired an emerging sign language in Nicaragua at the same age but during di
90 The results show that neural activity tracks sign language input in delta frequency band (0.5 to 2.5
91 rs should maximise their exposure to diverse signed language input, both in terms of viewing angle an
92 res is crucial for advancements in robotics, sign language interpretation and human-computer interact
93 p-reading interpreter and a hearing American sign language interpreter worked together in a circuit f
94 ion (such as lip reading, writing notes, and sign language interpreter); medication safety and other
95 ticulation in the hand movement sequences of sign language interpreters engaged in fingerspelling.
96 r making some accommodations, such as hiring sign language interpreters.
97                                 The American Sign Language interviews of 54 deaf adults were analyzed
98                              The syntax of a signed language is mediated through space.
99                    The data suggests that L2 signed language learners should maximise their exposure
100                                           In sign languages, linguistic information is transmitted th
101 rtical entrainment to visual oscillations in sign language <5 Hz, peaking at [Formula: see text]1 Hz.
102 language processing (perception, production, sign language, meaning construction), new insights and a
103 h sensor to record videos of semispontaneous sign language narratives while tracking articulators' mo
104 nd maturation of this category in Nicaraguan Sign Language (NSL).
105 storically unrelated) Italian Sign Language, Sign Language of the Netherlands, and Turkish Sign Langu
106 o widely held and contradictory views - that sign languages of deaf people are "just gestures," or th
107 examples from research on the brain bases of sign language perception.
108 tructure of sensorimotor features underlying sign language phonology in these networks remains unknow
109 ence of hearing status on the recruitment of sign language processing systems was explored by compari
110 the role of suboptimal viewing conditions on signed language processing is less clear.
111 powerful, scalable solution for vision-based sign language recognition systems, combining high accura
112 assification, blood cell classification, and sign language recognition, demonstrate superior performa
113                        Despite the fact that sign language relies on visuospatial rather than rapid t
114 e, neuroimaging studies show that spoken and sign language rely on similar areas of the brain in the
115                   The fluent production of a signed language requires exquisite coordination of senso
116 ion arises of whether the comprehension of a signed language requires neural systems specific for thi
117 n of humans and other primates, I argue that sign language research might benefit from the lessons le
118                                The fact that sign languages share the visual-manual modality with a n
119 language lexical coactivation for spoken and signed language showed how the impact of temporal struct
120 ns from (the historically unrelated) Italian Sign Language, Sign Language of the Netherlands, and Tur
121 terview Schedule-III, Revised, into American Sign Language, Signed English, and speech reading for de
122 translation of selected scales into American Sign Language, Signed English, and speech reading; revie
123 tance priming paradigm, we show that British Sign Language signers are slower and less accurate to co
124 vian language areas during the perception of signed language signs.
125                                      Using a sign language since infancy might shape the representati
126 despite having no previous experience with a sign language, six-month-old infants can extract the red
127 at these visual cues were used by all of the sign languages studied here.
128                                              Signed languages such as American Sign Language (ASL) ar
129                              We investigated sign language that enables deaf individuals to communica
130 nonsigners lacking any prior experience with sign language understand these encodings.
131 ion is a unique feature of spoken languages, signed languages use facial expressions and hand movemen
132 hearing-ability oppression), and linguicism (sign language-use oppression) and this study investigate
133                                              Sign languages used by deaf communities around the world
134 in-Meadow & Brentari (G-M&B) argue that, for sign language users, gesture - in contrast to linguistic
135                                              Sign-language users (signers) recognized visual objects
136 , we examined the linguistic abilities of 23 sign-language users with unilateral brain lesions.
137 ocessing of linguistic structure in American Sign Language (using verbs of motion classifier construc
138 t of neural oscillations to visual change in sign language, using electroencephalography (EEG) in flu
139    Correlation analyses of the production of sign language versus non-linguistic hand gestures sugges
140 characterize the temporal periodicity of the sign language visual signal and as stimuli for the exper
141                               By focusing on sign language we could better characterize the impact of
142 and Dar freely converse in signs of American Sign Language with each other as well as with humans in
143 cons in textual communication and gesture in signed language with respect to the interdependence of c
144  be more difficult for late L2 learners of a signed language, with less variation in sign input while

 
Page Top