Prof. Dr. Christian Rathmann

Profil

Zusammenfassung

Christian Rathmann erforscht Spracherwerb und Mehrsprachigkeit bei gehörlosen und schwerhörigen Kindern, mit Fokus auf Gebärdensprache und Schriftsprache. Seine Arbeit verbindet linguistische, neurowissenschaftliche und entwicklungspsychologische Perspektiven, um zu verstehen, wie frühe Sprachexposition die kognitiven und literalen Fähigkeiten von Kindern mit Hörverlust beeinflusst. Er berät Fachleute und Eltern evidenzbasiert bei Entscheidungen zur sprachlichen und medizinischen Versorgung gehörloser Kinder.

Skills

Name

Prof. Dr. Christian Rathmann

Titel

Prof. Dr.

Fakultät

Kultur-, Sozial- und Bildungswissenschaftliche Fakultät

Institut

Institut für Rehabilitationswissenschaften

Arbeitsgruppe

Gebärdensprachdolmetschen

E-Mail

🔒 nur für eingeloggte sichtbarAnmelden

Telefon

🔒 nur für eingeloggte sichtbarAnmelden

HU-FIS-Profil

Quelle ↗

Zuletzt gescrapt

27.6.2026, 01:12:35

• Einrichtung und Betrieb der Fachstelle Teilhabeberatung im Rahmen der Förderung der ergänzenden unabhängigen Teilhabeberatung

  Quelle ↗

  Zeitraum: 08/2017 - 12/2022 Projektleitung: Prof. Dr. Christian Rathmann

• Ko-Aktivierung von Deutscher Gebärdensprache und deutscher Schriftsprache bei tauben bimodal-bilingualen Personen und hörenden L2/M2-Lerner*innen: Behaviorale und neuronale Korrelate im Entwicklungsverlauf

  Quelle ↗

  Förderer: DFG Sachbeihilfe Zeitraum: 07/2022 - 07/2025 Projektleitung: Prof. Dr. Agnes Kristina Villwock, Prof. Dr. Michael Wahl

🔒 Das System hat 206 mögliche Industrie-Partner gefunden — Firmen, Scores und Begründungen sind nur für eingeloggte Nutzer:innen sichtbar. Anmelden

• Language acquisition for deaf children: Reducing the harms of zero tolerance to the use of alternative approaches

  2012

  Harm Reduction Journal · 339 Zitationen · DOI

  Children acquire language without instruction as long as they are regularly and meaningfully engaged with an accessible human language. Today, 80% of children born deaf in the developed world are implanted with cochlear devices that allow some of them access to sound in their early years, which helps them to develop speech. However, because of brain plasticity changes during early childhood, children who have not acquired a first language in the early years might never be completely fluent in any language. If they miss this critical period for exposure to a natural language, their subsequent development of the cognitive activities that rely on a solid first language might be underdeveloped, such as literacy, memory organization, and number manipulation. An alternative to speech-exclusive approaches to language acquisition exists in the use of sign languages such as American Sign Language (ASL), where acquiring a sign language is subject to the same time constraints of spoken language development. Unfortunately, so far, these alternatives are caught up in an "either - or" dilemma, leading to a highly polarized conflict about which system families should choose for their children, with little tolerance for alternatives by either side of the debate and widespread misinformation about the evidence and implications for or against either approach. The success rate with cochlear implants is highly variable. This issue is still debated, and as far as we know, there are no reliable predictors for success with implants. Yet families are often advised not to expose their child to sign language. Here absolute positions based on ideology create pressures for parents that might jeopardize the real developmental needs of deaf children. What we do know is that cochlear implants do not offer accessible language to many deaf children. By the time it is clear that the deaf child is not acquiring spoken language with cochlear devices, it might already be past the critical period, and the child runs the risk of becoming linguistically deprived. Linguistic deprivation constitutes multiple personal harms as well as harms to society (in terms of costs to our medical systems and in loss of potential productive societal participation).

• Ensuring language acquisition for deaf children: What linguists can do

  2014

  Language · 151 Zitationen · DOI

  Parents of small deaf children need guidance on constructing home and school environments that affect normal language acquisition. They often turn to physicians and spiritual leaders and, increasingly, the internet. These sources can be underinformed about crucial issues, such as matters of brain plasticity connected to the risk of linguistic deprivation, and delay or disruption in the development of cognitive skills interwoven with linguistic ability. We have formed a team of specialists in education, linguistics, pediatric medicine, and psychology, and at times specialists in theology and in law have joined our group. We argue that deaf children should be taught a sign language in the early years. This does not preclude oral-aural training and assistive technology. With a strong first language (a sign language), the child can become bilingual (with the written form of the ambient spoken language and, perhaps, the spoken form), accruing the benefits of bilingualism. We have published in medical journals, addressing primary care physicians, in a journal with a spiritual-leader readership, and in a health-law journal. Articles in progress address medical educators and practitioners. Team members present findings at conferences, work on lobbying and legislative efforts with the National Association of the Deaf, and spread the word at conferences of target audiences. We share our work in Word format, so that anyone can easily appropriate it for our common interests. One of our articles has been downloaded over 27,000 times (as of April 2014), and we are asked to consult with committees in other countries as they draft national policies.

• Should All Deaf Children Learn Sign Language?

  2015

  PEDIATRICS · 145 Zitationen · DOI

  Every year, 10,000 infants are born in the United States with sensorineural deafness. Deaf children of hearing (and nonsigning) parents are unique among all children in the world in that they cannot easily or naturally learn the language that their parents speak. These parents face tough choices. Should they seek a cochlear implant for their child? If so, should they also learn to sign? As pediatricians, we need to help parents understand the risks and benefits of different approaches to parent-child communication when the child is deaf [corrected].

Aus HU-FIS sind keine Kooperationen für diese Person gemeldet.