Blissymbols are currently being used by a variety of special education programs for children and adults with communication impairments. However, there is little available research on the learnability of such systems in general, and the Bliss system in particular. The present study was designed to answer some basic questions about the psycholinguistic and learning characteristics of blissymbols. Two hundred symbols (14% of all existing symbols) were rated by college students for their inherent guessability (transparency) and also for the amount of perceived relationship between the symbol (translucency) and the symbol's meaning (gloss). The results indicate that the blissymbols are low in iconicity but that they are relatively translucent, and that translucency is related to component complexity. These findings are related to the learnability of the symbols and represent the first steps toward the development of a primary lexicon based on learnability characteristics in conjunction with other features.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Blau, A.F. (1983). Vocabulary selection in augmentative communication. Where do we begin? In Winits (Ed.), Treating language disorders: For clinicians by clinicians. Baltimore: University Park Press.
Bliss, C.K. & McNaughton, S. (1965). The book to the film: "Mr. symbol man."Sydney, Australia: Semantography Publications.
4.
Carrier, J.K. (1976). Application of a nonspeech language system with the severely language handicapped. In L.L. Lloyd (Ed.), Communication assessment and intervention strategy . Baltimore: University Park Press .
5.
Daniloff, J.K., Lloyd, L.L. & Fristoe, M. (1981). Amer-Ind transparency. Journal of Speech and Hearing Disorders, 48, 103-110.
6.
Fristoe, M. & Lloyd, L.L. (1979). Nonspeech communication. In N.R. Ellis (Ed.), Handbook of mental deficiency . Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
7.
Griffith, P.L. & Robinson, J.H. (1980). Influence of iconicity and phonological similarity on sign learning by mentally retarded children . American Journal of Mental Deficiency, 85, 291-298.
8.
Harris, D. & Vandfrheiden, G.C. (1980). Augmentative communication techniques. In R.L. Schiefelbusch (Ed.), Nonspeech language and communication. Baltimore : University Park Press.
9.
Hehner, B. (1980). Blissymbols for use. Toronto , Canada: Blissymbolics Communication Institute.
10.
Hoemann, H.W. (1975). The transparency of meaning of sign language gestures . Sign Language Studies, 7, 151-161.
11.
Hollis, J.H. & Schiefelbusch, R.L. (1979). A general system for language analysis: Ape and child. In R.L. Schiefelbusch & J.H. Hollis (Eds.), Language intervention from ape to child. Baltimore: University Park Press.
12.
Luftig, R.L. (1982). Increasing probability of sign language learning by severely mentally retarded individuals. Applied Research in Mental Retardation, 3, 81-97.
13.
Luftig, R.L. (in press, a). An analysis of initial sign lexicons for young and adolescent/ adult severely mentally retarded individuals as a function of eight learnability variables. Journal of the Association for Severely Handicapped .
14.
Luftig, R.L. (in press, b). Effects of cheremic similarity and perceived sign translucency on the learning of ASL signs. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research Quarterly.
15.
Luftig, R.L. (1983). Variables influencing the learnability of individual signs and sign lexicons: A review. Journal of psycholinguistic Research, 12, 361-376.
16.
Luftig, R.L. & Bersani, H.B., JR. (1984). Translucency and component complexity of Blissymbolics and their influence on symbol learning. Unpublished manuscript, Miami University, Oxford, OH .
17.
Luftig, R.L. & Bersani, H.B. (in press). An investigation of the efficiency of Blissymbolics vs. print in the symbol learning of nonreading, preschool pupils. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research.
18.
Luftig, R.L. & Lloyd, L.L. (1981). Manual sign translucency and referential concreteness in the learning of sign. Sign Language studies, 30, 49-60.
19.
Luftig, R.L., Lloyd, L.L. & Page, J.L. (1982). Ratings of sign translucency and gloss concreteness of two grammatical classes of manual sign. Sign Language Studies , 37, 345-386.
20.
Luftig, R.L., Page, J.L. & Lloyd, L.L. (1983). Ratings of 854 ASL signs for perceived translucency . Journal of Children with Communication Disorders, 6, 117-134.
21.
Mcnaughton, S. & Kates, B. (1980). The application of Blissymbolics. In R.L. Schiefelbusch (Ed.), Nonspeech language and communication. Baltimore: University Park Press.
22.
Shiefelbusch, R.L. (1980). A discussion of special issues. In R.L. Schiefelbusch (Ed.), Nonspeech language and communication. Baltimore: University Park Press.
23.
Siple, P., Fischer, S.P. & Bellugi, U. (1977). Memory for nonsemantic attributes of American Sign Language and English Words. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 16, 561-574.
24.
Wilbur, R.B. (1976). The linguistics of manual languages and manual systems. In L.L. Lloyd (Ed.), Communication assessment and intervention strategies. Baltimore: University Park Press.
25.
Wilbur, R.B. (1980). Nonspeech symbol systems. In R.L. Schiefelbusch (Ed.), Nonspeech language and communication. Baltimore: University Park Press.
