ResearchPod Summary
This study explores the identity formation and language investment of adult hearing children of Deaf adults (Codas) in Sweden. Codas navigate a unique bimodal-bilingual environment, often bridging Deaf culture and the hearing, spoken-language society. By interviewing 12 adults, the authors examine how this upbringing influences the participants' self-perception, social awareness, and willingness to use and safeguard their languages.
The researchers utilized a qualitative, theory-driven thematic analysis, applying Bonny Norton’s framework of identity and investment to semi-structured interviews conducted in Swedish Sign Language (STS). This theoretical lens allows for an analysis of how individuals negotiate their sense of self and their commitment to language learning, not just as a cognitive task, but as a sociological process shaped by power, social structures, and personal experience.
The participants consistently reported that growing up in a bimodal household fostered a heightened linguistic and social sensitivity. Many participants described their ability to "read" body language and emotions as a profound asset, which they often carry into their adult professional lives. Rather than experiencing their upbringing as a series of cognitive deficits, most participants characterized their bimodal-bilingual status as a source of strength and empathy. Their identity is often described as multifaceted; they do not necessarily see themselves as fully "Deaf" or "hearing," but rather as individuals possessing a unique, bicultural awareness that allows them to navigate diverse societal spaces.
This research highlights how Codas often become accidental brokers between Deaf and hearing worlds. The study demonstrates that societal attitudes toward sign language—and the level of support provided to Deaf families—directly influence the degree to which these children choose to invest in sign language later in life. Understanding these experiences is essential for educators, policymakers, and clinicians, as it reveals that supporting Deaf parents and their hearing children is not just a matter of linguistic development, but a critical component of individual well-being and social equity.
Sam: Growing up signing and speaking can shape more than how you communicate. Interviews with Swedish hearing adults raised by Deaf parents suggest it also shapes belonging, social awareness, and commitment to language.
Alex: So the question isn't simply whether someone knows both languages. It's how growing up with them becomes part of who they are?
Sam: That's the focus of Karin Allard and Carin Roos's qualitative interview study, published in twenty twenty-five. For researchers studying language or education, it shifts attention from proficiency alone to recognition and belonging. We'll follow the interviews, the authors' interpretation, and the limits of what these accounts establish.
Alex: Before we get into the findings, who counts as part of this group?
Sam: The participants are Codas, meaning hearing children of Deaf adults. Here, they grew up in families using Swedish Sign Language and Swedish. The authors call this bimodal bilingualism: using a signed language and a spoken language, rather than two spoken languages.
Alex: Bilingual identity already has a substantial literature. What was missing that made these interviews useful?
Sam: The authors found relatively little research on adult Codas' lives and experiences. Much previous work examined early language acquisition or interactions between Deaf parents and hearing children. This study instead asks how adults connect their upbringing with identity and their choices about using their languages.
Alex: There's also a recognition problem here. If people hear fluent Swedish, they might never recognize another language in someone's life.
Sam: The paper describes precisely that problem in schools and wider society. Codas can be treated as monolingual Swedish speakers. Swedish law protects their right to develop both languages, but the government authority responsible has identified shortcomings in support, particularly at school.
Alex: How did the researchers get beyond general statements about living between cultures?
Sam: They interviewed twelve adults in Sweden. Recruitment used their networks of sign-language users, followed by snowball sampling, where contacts lead to further participants. The sample included varied occupations, family circumstances, and levels of sign-language knowledge.
AI-generated third-party summary by ResearchPod. Not official content or an endorsement by the paper authors or affiliated organizations.
Alex: Childhood opportunities could differ considerably across generations. Did they capture any of that variation?
Sam: Participants ranged from eighteen to fifty years old. The younger participants had access to sign-language instruction during compulsory schooling. The oldest had received none. That's useful context for their accounts, although this wasn't a design that could isolate the effect of schooling.
Alex: What language were the interviews in? That choice seems especially relevant when the subject is belonging.
Sam: A Deaf author conducted them in Swedish Sign Language, with participants' agreement. The researchers felt signing helped evoke memories of growing up in a signing family. A licensed interpreter translated the recordings into Swedish text, collaborating with the researchers to check the translations.
Alex: So these are interpreted accounts of experience, not assessments of either language. What organizes the analysis?
Sam: Bonny Norton's concepts of social identity and investment. Social identity concerns who people understand themselves to be through social relationships. Investment concerns their socially shaped commitment and opportunities to develop and use language.
Alex: Why use investment rather than motivation? Both could sound like wanting to learn or use a language.
Sam: The distinction is that wanting isn't enough. Other people's attitudes, access to education, and opportunities to belong can enable or restrict language use. Norton's framework challenges explanations that locate difficulties mainly in individual shortcomings or low motivation.
Alex: Can you give a concrete case where that distinction changes how we read someone's choices?
Sam: One participant grew up with parents who signed to each other but used sign-supported Swedish with their children. That participant reported limited Swedish Sign Language proficiency and chose not to develop it further. Yet, as an adult, they defended Deaf people's language rights through political engagement.
Alex: So limited use didn't mean indifference to the people or the language. Their commitment took a different form.
Sam: That's how the authors interpret it. They also suggest that earlier attitudes toward signing may have shaped this participant's choices. That explanation remains an interpretation of the account, not a demonstrated causal chain.
Alex: Let's turn to the broader pattern. What did the interviews suggest about identity?
Sam: The authors organized their interpretation around linguistic, cultural, and social awareness. Linguistic awareness included reflecting on how the languages work. One participant described interpreting for parents as listening for relevant information before conveying it: an everyday task requiring analysis of meaning.
Alex: And awareness of culture meant noticing different expectations, not just switching vocabulary?
Sam: Participants encountered different communication norms at home, in Deaf community settings, and in hearing schools or workplaces. Some described feeling different when signing versus speaking. Others emphasized facial expression, movement, and bodily communication as parts of their identity.
Alex: The social-awareness claim could sound like saying signing makes people more empathetic. Is that actually what they measured?
Sam: No. Participants described themselves as sensitive to body language, other people's needs, and discrimination. The authors connect those accounts to growing up in signing families. They did not independently test empathy or compare it with a nonsigning group.
Alex: That still tells us something about identity: these are qualities participants value and associate with their upbringing.
Sam: Yes, alongside less comfortable experiences. Some recalled feeling different without understanding why, or feeling they weren't good enough. Younger participants described Coda camps as places to share family experiences, strengthen language, and recognize that other people's lack of understanding wasn't their own failing.
Alex: Did those experiences produce a shared identity label, or was the picture less tidy?
Sam: Less tidy. The study doesn't find a single, distinct Deaf, hearing, or even Coda identity across participants. Some felt caught between worlds; others valued belonging across them. The authors describe multifaceted identities shaped through encounters with Deaf families and hearing society.
Alex: How visible was language investment in adult life? That's where the argument moves beyond childhood memories.
Sam: Eight of the twelve participants worked in settings using Swedish Sign Language. Participants also described advocacy, solidarity, and safeguarding communication. Swedish, by contrast, generally appeared as a taken-for-granted part of life, attracting less reflection.
Alex: Those occupations fit the argument, but recruitment through signing networks might favor people with continuing connections. How far should we trust the pattern?
Sam: I would trust it as evidence of these participants' experiences, not as a population estimate. The sample is small and network-recruited, with no external comparison group. The analysis was explicitly theory-driven, so it offers a reading through identity and investment, not a test against competing explanations.
Alex: And if we moved outside Sweden, the same family experience might meet different institutions and attitudes.
Sam: The authors identify that limitation themselves. Swedish cultural norms may make it difficult to attribute the findings to Coda experience alone. They also note the absence of a Coda researcher and interview questions specifically addressing factors such as gender and social class.
Alex: Who should give the full article time, and where should they start?
Sam: Researchers in bilingual identity, Deaf education, and language policy. The title is “Identity formation in bimodal-bilingual children of Deaf adults.” Start with the results on identity formation and investing in languages and cultures, especially the participant who advocates without developing signing proficiency. Then read the limitations before extending the argument beyond this setting.
Alex: And what should everyone else carry away?
Sam: In these accounts, commitment to a language is about belonging and recognition, not just skill.
Alex: Thanks for listening.