The prominence of spoken language elements in a sign language

Linguistics ◽  
2016 ◽  
Vol 54 (6) ◽  
Author(s):  
Richard Bank ◽  
Onno Crasborn ◽  
Roeland van Hout
Keyword(s):  
The Netherlands ◽  
Sign Language ◽  
Spoken Language ◽  
Visual Modality ◽  
Sign Languages ◽  
Level Of Education ◽  
Code Mixing ◽  
Regional Origin ◽  
Manual Signs ◽  
Information Streams

Abstractin sign languages consist of simultaneously articulated manual signs and spoken language words. These “mouthings” (typically silent articulations) have been observed for many different sign languages. The present study aims to investigate the extent of such bimodal code-mixing in sign languages by investigating the frequency of mouthings produced by deaf users of Sign Language of the Netherlands (NGT), their co-occurrence with pointing signs, and whether any differences can be explained by sociolinguistic variables such as regional origin and age of the signer. We investigated over 10,000 mouth actions from 70 signers, and found that the mouth and the hands are equally active during signing. Moreover, around 80 % of all mouth actions are mouthings, while the remaining 20 % are unrelated to Dutch. We found frequency differences between individual signers and a small effect for level of education, but not for other sociolinguistic variables. Our results provide genuine evidence that mouthings form an inextricable component of signed interaction. Rather than displaying effects of competition between languages or spoken language suppression, NGT signers demonstrate the potential of the visual modality to conjoin parallel information streams.

scholarly journals Bimodal code-mixing: Dutch spoken language elements in NGT discourse

2016 ◽  
Vol 21 (1) ◽  
pp. 104-120 ◽  
Author(s):  
RICHARD BANK ◽  
ONNO CRASBORN ◽  
ROELAND VAN HOUT
Keyword(s):  
Sign Language ◽  
Spoken Language ◽  
Mixing Models ◽  
Code Mixing ◽  
Language Discourse ◽  
Sentence Level ◽  
The Matrix ◽  
Manual Signs ◽  
Almost All ◽  
Level Analysis

Mouthings, the spoken language elements in sign language discourse, are typically analysed as having a redundant, one-on-one relationship with manual signs, both semantically and temporally. We explore exceptions to this presupposed semantic and temporal congruency in a corpus of spontaneous signed conversation by deaf users of Sign Language of the Netherlands (NGT). We identify specifying mouthings (words with a different meaning than the co-occurring sign), solo mouthings (uttered while the hands are inactive) and added mouthings (words added to a signing stream without their corresponding sign), and make a sentence-level analysis of their occurrences. These non-redundant mouthings occurred in 12% of all utterances, and were made by almost all signers. We argue for the presence of a code-blending continuum for NGT, where NGT is the matrix language and spoken Dutch is blended in, in various degrees. We suggest expansion of existing code-mixing models, to allow for description of bimodal mixing.

De Nederlandse Gebarentaal En Taalonderwijs

1991 ◽  
Vol 39 ◽  
pp. 75-82
Author(s):  
Beppie van den Bogaerde
Keyword(s):  
The Netherlands ◽  
Sign Language ◽  
Spoken Language ◽  
Language Teachers ◽  
Deaf Children ◽  
Deaf People ◽  
Teaching Materials ◽  
Sign Languages ◽  
Language Courses ◽  
Native Signers

Sign Language of the Netherlands (SLN) is considered to be the native language of many prelingually deaf people in the Netherlands. Although research has provided evidence that sign languages are fully fletched natural languages, many misconceptions still abound about sign languages and deaf people. The low status of sign languages all over the world and the attitude of hearing people towards deaf people and their languages, and the resulting attitude of the deaf towards their own languages, restricted the development of these languages until recently. Due to the poor results of deaf education and the dissatisfaction amongst educators of the deaf, parents of deaf children and deaf people themselves, a change of attitude towards the function of sign language in the interaction with deaf people can be observed; many hearing people dealing with deaf people one way or the other wish to learn the sign language of the deaf community of their country. Many hearing parents of deaf children, teachers of the deaf, student-interpreters and linguists are interested in sign language and want to follow a course to improve their signing ability. In order to develop sign language courses, sign language teachers and teaching materials are needed. And precisely these are missing. This is caused by several factors. First, deaf people in general do not receive the same education as hearing people, due to their inability to learn the spoken language of their environment to such an extent, that they have access to the full eduational program. This prohibits them a.o. to become teachers in elementary and secondary schools, or to become sign language teachers. Althought they are fluent "signers", they lack the competence in the spoken language of their country to obtain a teacher's degree in their sign language. A second problem is caused by the fact, that sign languages are visual languages: no adequate system has yet been found to write down a sign language. So until now hardly any teaching materials were available. Sign language courses should be developed with the help of native signers who should be educated to become language-teachers; with their help and with the help of video-material and computer-software, it will be possible in future to teach sign languages as any other language. But in order to reach this goal, it is imperative that deaf children get a better education so that they can contribute to the emancipation of their language.

Variation in mouth actions with manual signs in Sign Language of the Netherlands (NGT)

2011 ◽  
Vol 14 (2) ◽  
pp. 248-270 ◽  
Author(s):  
Richard Bank ◽  
Onno A. Crasborn ◽  
Roeland van Hout
Keyword(s):  
The Netherlands ◽  
Sign Language ◽  
Lexical Item ◽  
The Other ◽  
Sign Languages ◽  
Corpus Study ◽  
Natural Data ◽  
Manual Signs ◽  
Insight Into ◽  
The Way

Mouthings and mouth gestures are omnipresent in Sign Language of the Netherlands (NGT). Mouthings in NGT commonly have their origin in spoken Dutch. We conducted a corpus study to explore how frequent mouthings in fact are in NGT, whether there is variation within and between signs in mouthings, and how frequent temporal reduction occurs in mouthings. Answers to these questions can help us classify mouthings as being specified in the sign lexicon or as being instances of code-blending. We investigated a sample of 20 frequently occurring signs. We found that each sign in the sample co-occurs frequently with a mouthing, usually that of a specific Dutch lexical item. On the other hand, signs show variation in the way they co-occur with mouthings and mouth gestures. By using a relatively large amount of natural data, we succeeded in gaining more insight into the way mouth actions are utilized in sign languages.

The Medium and the Message

1999 ◽  
Vol 2 (2) ◽  
pp. 187-215 ◽  
Author(s):  
Wendy Sandler
Keyword(s):  
Facial Expression ◽  
Sign Language ◽  
Spoken Language ◽  
Sign Languages ◽  
Prosodic Word ◽  
Special Stress ◽  
New Perspective ◽  
New Evidence ◽  
Phonological Phrase ◽  
The Relationship

In natural communication, the medium through which language is transmitted plays an important and systematic role. Sentences are broken up rhythmically into chunks; certain elements receive special stress; and, in spoken language, intonational tunes are superimposed onto these chunks in particular ways — all resulting in an intricate system of prosody. Investigations of prosody in Israeli Sign Language demonstrate that sign languages have comparable prosodic systems to those of spoken languages, although the phonetic medium is completely different. Evidence for the prosodic word and for the phonological phrase in ISL is examined here within the context of the relationship between the medium and the message. New evidence is offered to support the claim that facial expression in sign languages corresponds to intonation in spoken languages, and the term “superarticulation” is coined to describe this system in sign languages. Interesting formaldiffer ences between the intonationaltunes of spoken language and the “superarticulatory arrays” of sign language are shown to offer a new perspective on the relation between the phonetic basis of language, its phonological organization, and its communicative content.

scholarly journals Visible Meaning: Sign language and the foundations of semantics

2018 ◽  
Vol 44 (3-4) ◽  
pp. 123-208 ◽  
Author(s):  
Philippe Schlenker
Keyword(s):  
Sign Language ◽  
Crucial Role ◽  
Universal Grammar ◽  
Logical Form ◽  
Indirect Evidence ◽  
Spoken Language ◽  
One Dimension ◽  
Dynamic Binding ◽  
Sign Languages ◽  
Context Shift

AbstractWhile it is now accepted that sign languages should inform and constrain theories of ‘Universal Grammar’, their role in ‘Universal Semantics’ has been under-studied. We argue that they have a crucial role to play in the foundations of semantics, for two reasons. First, in some casessign languages provide overt evidence on crucial aspects of the Logical Form of sentences, ones that are only inferred indirectly in spoken language. For instance, sign language ‘loci’ are positions in signing space that can arguably realize logical variables, and the fact that they are overt makes it possible to revisit foundational debates about the syntactic reality of variables, about mechanisms of temporal and modal anaphora, and about the existence of dynamic binding. Another example pertains to mechanisms of ‘context shift’, which were postulated on the basis of indirect evidence in spoken language, but which are arguably overt in sign language. Second, along one dimensionsign languages are strictly more expressive than spoken languagesbecause iconic phenomena can be found at their logical core. This applies to loci themselves, which maysimultaneouslyfunction as logical variables and as schematic pictures of what they denote (context shift comes with some iconic requirements as well). As a result, the semantic system of spoken languages can in some respects be seen as a simplified version of the richer semantics found in sign languages. Two conclusions could be drawn from this observation. One is that the full extent of Universal Semantics can only be studied in sign languages. An alternative possibility is that spoken languages have comparable expressive mechanisms, but only when co-speech gestures are taken into account (as recently argued by Goldin-Meadow and Brentari). Either way, sign languages have a crucial role to play in investigations of the foundations of semantics.

scholarly journals Deaf children need language, not (just) speech

2019 ◽  
Vol 39 (4) ◽  
pp. 367-395 ◽  
Author(s):  
Matthew L. Hall ◽  
Wyatte C. Hall ◽  
Naomi K. Caselli
Keyword(s):  
Sign Language ◽  
Cochlear Implants ◽  
Research Evidence ◽  
Spoken Language ◽  
Deaf Children ◽  
Full Potential ◽  
Sign Languages ◽  
Language Deprivation ◽  
Language Exposure ◽  
Harmful Effects

Deaf and Hard of Hearing (DHH) children need to master at least one language (spoken or signed) to reach their full potential. Providing access to a natural sign language supports this goal. Despite evidence that natural sign languages are beneficial to DHH children, many researchers and practitioners advise families to focus exclusively on spoken language. We critique the Pediatrics article ‘Early Sign Language Exposure and Cochlear Implants’ (Geers et al., 2017) as an example of research that makes unsupported claims against the inclusion of natural sign languages. We refute claims that (1) there are harmful effects of sign language and (2) that listening and spoken language are necessary for optimal development of deaf children. While practical challenges remain (and are discussed) for providing a sign language-rich environment, research evidence suggests that such challenges are worth tackling in light of natural sign languages providing a host of benefits for DHH children – especially in the prevention and reduction of language deprivation.

Frequency distribution and spreading behavior of different types of mouth actions in three sign languages

2008 ◽  
Vol 11 (1) ◽  
pp. 45-67 ◽  
Author(s):  
Onno A. Crasborn ◽  
Els van der Kooij ◽  
Dafydd Waters ◽  
Bencie Woll ◽  
Johanna Mesch
Keyword(s):  
The Netherlands ◽  
Comparative Study ◽  
Sign Language ◽  
Frequency Distribution ◽  
Sign Languages ◽  
Spreading Behavior ◽  
British Sign Language ◽  
Different Types ◽  
Primary Focus ◽  
British Sign

In this paper, we present a comparative study of mouth actions in three European sign languages: British Sign Language (BSL), Nederlandse Gebarentaal (Sign Language of the Netherlands, NGT), and Swedish Sign Language (SSL). We propose a typology for, and report the frequency distribution of, the different types of mouth actions observed. In accordance with previous studies, we find the three languages remarkably similar — both in the types of mouth actions they use, and in how these mouth actions are distributed. We then describe how mouth actions can extend over more than one manual sign. This spreading of mouth actions is the primary focus of this paper. Based on an analysis of comparable narrative material in the three languages, we demonstrate that the direction as well as the source and goal of spreading may be language-specific.

What is the chin doing?: An analysis of interrogatives in Austrian sign language

2006 ◽  
Vol 9 (1-2) ◽  
pp. 133-150 ◽  
Author(s):  
Katharina Schalber
Keyword(s):  
Sign Language ◽  
Language Contact ◽  
Sign Languages ◽  
Syntactic Position ◽  
Common Foundation ◽  
Wh Questions ◽  
Manual Signs ◽  
Chin Down

The aim of this paper is to investigate the structure of polar (yes/no questions) and content questions (wh-questions) in Austrian Sign Language (ÖGS), analyzing the different nonmanual signals, the occurrence of question signs and their syntactic position. As I will show, the marking strategies used in ÖGS are no exception to the crosslinguistic observations that interrogative constructions in sign languages employ a variety of nonmanual signals and manual signs (Zeshan 2004). In ÖGS polar questions are marked with ‘chin down’, whereas content questions are indicated with ‘chin up’ or ‘head forward’ and content question signs. These same nonmanual markers are reported for Croatian sign language, indicating common foundation due to historical relations and intense language contact.

scholarly journals Signing not (or not): A typological perspective on standard negation in Sign Language of the Netherlands

2017 ◽  
Vol 21 (1) ◽  
pp. 1-51 ◽  
Author(s):  
Marloes Oomen ◽  
Roland Pfau
Keyword(s):  
The Netherlands ◽  
Sign Language ◽  
Detailed Comparison ◽  
Sign Languages ◽  
Negative Element ◽  
Grammaticality Judgment ◽  
Corpus Data ◽  
Typological Variation

AbstractThe expression of standard negation by means of manual and/or non-manual markers has been described for a considerable number of sign languages. Typological comparisons have revealed an intriguing dichotomy: while some sign languages require a manual negative element in negative clauses (manual-dominant sign languages), in others negation can be realized by a non-manual marker alone (in particular a headshake; non-manual-dominant sign languages). We are here adding data from Sign Language of the Netherlands (NGT) to the picture, and we demonstrate that NGT belongs to the latter group. Still, detailed comparison suggests that NGT patterns differently from other non-manual-dominant sign languages, thereby improving our understanding of the typological variation in this domain. A novel contribution of the present study is that it is based on naturalistic corpus data, showing more variation than often found in elicitation and grammaticality judgment studies of sign languages, but also presenting new problems of interpretation.

Weak hand holds in two sign languages and two genres

2015 ◽  
Vol 18 (2) ◽  
pp. 205-237 ◽  
Author(s):  
Anna Sáfár ◽  
Vadim Kimmelman
Keyword(s):  
Quantitative Analysis ◽  
The Netherlands ◽  
Sign Language ◽  
Linguistic Analysis ◽  
Genre Analysis ◽  
Sign Languages ◽  
Modality Effects ◽  
Corpus Data

In this paper, we provide a quantitative analysis of weak hand holds based on corpus data. We include both a cross-linguistic analysis of these holds in narrative data from Russian Sign Language (RSL) and Sign Language of the Netherlands (NGT), and a language-internal, cross-genre analysis comparing NGT narrative and conversational data. We classified the functions of all holds found in two corpora of RSL and NGT, and analyzed their formal characteristics. We found that holds in RSL and NGT have similar functions. However, holds are significantly more frequent in RSL than in NGT. In addition, we found that the distribution of holds across different functions varies between different genres in NGT. The similarities between RSL and NGT in the domain of holds may be attributed to modality effects. The differences in frequency of holds ask for a language-specific explanation, and we discuss several possible scenarios.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document