Response to Mayer and Wells: The Answer Should Be Affirmative

Abstract

Mayer and Wells (1996) formulated and responded to the following question: "Can the linguistic interdependence theory support a bilingual-bicultural model of literacy education for Deaf students?" The authors apparently based their response to the question on their understanding, reflection, and interpretation of Vygot-sky's version of the "inner speech" notion and Cum-mins's linguistic interdependence and common underlying proficiency hypotheses (Mayer & Wells, 1996). Their main contention is that a first language (LI) and a second language (L2) do not become linguistically interdependent unless they share common characteristics. Examples of such characteristics include: (1) both have spoken and written forms that represent the same linguistic code and an external speech that provides a bridge between inner and written speech; (2) the LI user should already have some mastery of the written mode in LI before learning the written mode of L2; (3) the LI speaker should have sufficient opportunities to interact with fluent L2 speakers to learn the new language ; and (4) the LI user should be able to use her or his written mode in a broad range of functions. Considering the above assumptions, the authors contended that the linguistic interdependence theory applicable to "heard-and-spoken" LI and L2 pairings (e.g., spoken English and French) is not applicable to "heard-and-Correspondence should be sent to David Mason,