Crosslinguistic similarity and variation in the simultaneous morphology of sign languages

2020 ◽  
Vol 37 (4) ◽  
pp. 571-608
Author(s):  
Diane Brentari ◽  
Laura Horton ◽  
Susan Goldin-Meadow
Keyword(s):  
American Sign Language ◽  
Sign Language ◽  
Optimality Theory ◽  
Sign Languages ◽  
British Sign Language ◽  
Verb Phrases ◽  
Classifier Predicates ◽  
Crosslinguistic Variation ◽  
Hong Kong Sign Language ◽  
British Sign

Abstract Two differences between signed and spoken languages that have been widely discussed in the literature are: the degree to which morphology is expressed simultaneously (rather than sequentially), and the degree to which iconicity is used, particularly in predicates of motion and location, often referred to as classifier predicates. In this paper we analyze a set of properties marking agency and number in four sign languages for their crosslinguistic similarities and differences regarding simultaneity and iconicity. Data from American Sign Language (ASL), Italian Sign Language (LIS), British Sign Language (BSL), and Hong Kong Sign Language (HKSL) are analyzed. We find that iconic, cognitive, phonological, and morphological factors contribute to the distribution of these properties. We conduct two analyses—one of verbs and one of verb phrases. The analysis of classifier verbs shows that, as expected, all four languages exhibit many common formal and iconic properties in the expression of agency and number. The analysis of classifier verb phrases (VPs)—particularly, multiple-verb predicates—reveals (a) that it is grammatical in all four languages to express agency and number within a single verb, but also (b) that there is crosslinguistic variation in expressing agency and number across the four languages. We argue that this variation is motivated by how each language prioritizes, or ranks, several constraints. The rankings can be captured in Optimality Theory. Some constraints in this account, such as a constraint to be redundant, are found in all information systems and might be considered non-linguistic; however, the variation in constraint ranking in verb phrases reveals the grammatical and arbitrary nature of linguistic systems.

scholarly journals Interpretation of Swedish Sign Language Using Convolutional Neural Networks and Transfer Learning

2021 ◽  
Vol 2 (3) ◽  
Author(s):  
Gustaf Halvardsson ◽  
Johanna Peterson ◽  
César Soto-Valero ◽  
Benoit Baudry
Keyword(s):  
Neural Networks ◽  
Sign Language ◽  
Transfer Learning ◽  
Convolutional Neural Networks ◽  
Web Application ◽  
Training Dataset ◽  
Motion Processing ◽  
Image Perception ◽  
Sign Languages ◽  
High Level

AbstractThe automatic interpretation of sign languages is a challenging task, as it requires the usage of high-level vision and high-level motion processing systems for providing accurate image perception. In this paper, we use Convolutional Neural Networks (CNNs) and transfer learning to make computers able to interpret signs of the Swedish Sign Language (SSL) hand alphabet. Our model consists of the implementation of a pre-trained InceptionV3 network, and the usage of the mini-batch gradient descent optimization algorithm. We rely on transfer learning during the pre-training of the model and its data. The final accuracy of the model, based on 8 study subjects and 9400 images, is 85%. Our results indicate that the usage of CNNs is a promising approach to interpret sign languages, and transfer learning can be used to achieve high testing accuracy despite using a small training dataset. Furthermore, we describe the implementation details of our model to interpret signs as a user-friendly web application.

scholarly journals Computer-assisted sign language translation: a study of translators’ practice to specify CAT software

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Marion Kaczmarek ◽  
Michael Filhol
Keyword(s):  
Sign Language ◽  
Language Translation ◽  
Computer Assisted ◽  
Translation Process ◽  
Sign Languages ◽  
Subjective Data ◽  
Do So

AbstractProfessional Sign Language translators, unlike their text-to-text counterparts, are not equipped with computer-assisted translation (CAT) software. Those softwares are meant to ease the translators’ tasks. No prior study as been conducted on this topic, and we aim at specifying such a software. To do so, we based our study on the professional Sign Language translators’ practices and needs. The aim of this paper is to identify the necessary steps in the text-to-sign translation process. By filming and interviewing professionals for both objective and subjective data, we build a list of tasks and see if they are systematic and performed in a definite order. Finally, we reflect on how CAT tools could assist those tasks, how to adapt the existing tools to Sign Language and what is necessary to add in order to fit the needs of Sign Language translation. In the long term, we plan to develop a first prototype of CAT software for sign languages.

The FATE Landscape of Sign Language AI Datasets

2021 ◽  
Vol 14 (2) ◽  
pp. 1-45
Author(s):  
Danielle Bragg ◽  
Naomi Caselli ◽  
Julie A. Hochgesang ◽  
Matt Huenerfauth ◽  
Leah Katz-Hernandez ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Sign Language ◽  
New Technology ◽  
Individual Data ◽  
Community Members ◽  
Sign Languages ◽  
Language Data ◽  
History Of ◽  
Language Technologies ◽  
And Storage ◽  
Access Mechanisms

Sign language datasets are essential to developing many sign language technologies. In particular, datasets are required for training artificial intelligence (AI) and machine learning (ML) systems. Though the idea of using AI/ML for sign languages is not new, technology has now advanced to a point where developing such sign language technologies is becoming increasingly tractable. This critical juncture provides an opportunity to be thoughtful about an array of Fairness, Accountability, Transparency, and Ethics (FATE) considerations. Sign language datasets typically contain recordings of people signing, which is highly personal. The rights and responsibilities of the parties involved in data collection and storage are also complex and involve individual data contributors, data collectors or owners, and data users who may interact through a variety of exchange and access mechanisms. Deaf community members (and signers, more generally) are also central stakeholders in any end applications of sign language data. The centrality of sign language to deaf culture identity, coupled with a history of oppression, makes usage by technologists particularly sensitive. This piece presents many of these issues that characterize working with sign language AI datasets, based on the authors’ experiences living, working, and studying in this space.

People Are Less Susceptible to Illusion When They Use Their Hands to Communicate Rather Than Estimate

2021 ◽  
pp. 095679762199155
Author(s):  
Amanda R. Brown ◽  
Wim Pouw ◽  
Diane Brentari ◽  
Susan Goldin-Meadow
Keyword(s):  
American Sign Language ◽  
Sign Language ◽  
English Speakers ◽  
American Sign ◽  
Estimation Task ◽  
Sign Languages ◽  
Lyer Illusion ◽  
Description Task ◽  
The Way

When we use our hands to estimate the length of a stick in the Müller-Lyer illusion, we are highly susceptible to the illusion. But when we prepare to act on sticks under the same conditions, we are significantly less susceptible. Here, we asked whether people are susceptible to illusion when they use their hands not to act on objects but to describe them in spontaneous co-speech gestures or conventional sign languages of the deaf. Thirty-two English speakers and 13 American Sign Language signers used their hands to act on, estimate the length of, and describe sticks eliciting the Müller-Lyer illusion. For both gesture and sign, the magnitude of illusion in the description task was smaller than the magnitude of illusion in the estimation task and not different from the magnitude of illusion in the action task. The mechanisms responsible for producing gesture in speech and sign thus appear to operate not on percepts involved in estimation but on percepts derived from the way we act on objects.

scholarly journals Comparability of signed and spoken languages: Absolute and relative modality effects in cross-modal typology

2020 ◽  
Vol 24 (3) ◽  
pp. 527-562
Author(s):  
Ulrike Zeshan ◽  
Nick Palfreyman
Keyword(s):  
Conceptual Framework ◽  
Sensory Perception ◽  
Sound Symbolism ◽  
The Other ◽  
Sign Languages ◽  
Linguistic Structure ◽  
Modality Effects ◽  
Inductive Approach

AbstractThis article sets out a conceptual framework and typology of modality effects in the comparison of signed and spoken languages. This is essential for a theory of cross-modal typology. We distinguish between relative modality effects, where a linguistic structure is markedly more common in one modality than in the other, and absolute modality effects, where a structure does not occur in one of the modalities at all. Using examples from a wide variety of sign languages, we discuss examples at the levels of phonology, morphology (including numerals, negation, and aspect) and semantics. At the phonological level, the issue of iconically motivated sub-lexical components in signs, and parallels with sound symbolism in spoken languages, is particularly pertinent. Sensory perception metaphors serve as an example for semantic comparison across modalities. Advocating an inductive approach to cross-modal comparison, we discuss analytical challenges in defining what is comparable across the signed and spoken modalities, and in carrying out such comparisons in a rigorous and empirically substantiated way.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document