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.

scholarly journals Phonological restrictions on nominal pluralization in Sign Language of the Netherlands: evidence from corpus and elicited data

2021 ◽  
Vol 0 (0) ◽  
Author(s):  
Cindy van Boven
Keyword(s):  
The Netherlands ◽  
Sign Language ◽  
Lateral Side ◽  
Midsagittal Plane ◽  
Comprehensive Description ◽  
Sign Languages ◽  
Corpus Data ◽  
Plural Marking ◽  
Complex Movement

Abstract This study focuses on nominal pluralization in Sign Language of the Netherlands (NGT). The aim is to offer a comprehensive description of nominal pluralization processes in the language, based on both corpus data and elicited data, taking into account potential phonological restrictions. The results reveal that NGT nouns can undergo several pluralization processes, the main ones being simple reduplication (i.e., repeating the noun sign at one location) and sideward reduplication (i.e., repeating the noun sign while moving the hand sideward). The choice of pluralization process depends on phonological properties of the base noun: (i) nouns that are body-anchored or involve a complex movement undergo simple reduplication; (ii) nouns articulated at the lateral side of the signing space undergo sideward reduplication; (iii) nouns articulated on the midsagittal plane can undergo both simple and sideward reduplication. Strikingly, the data show considerable variation, and all types of nouns can be zero-marked, that is, plural marking on the noun is not obligatory. The results further suggest that all nouns can undergo at least one type of reduplication. Thus, while phonological properties of the base noun influence the type of reduplication, they do not block reduplication altogether. Plural reduplication in NGT is therefore less constrained than has been reported for other sign languages, where certain noun types cannot undergo reduplication. This shows that reduplication – despite being iconically motivated – is subject to language-specific grammatical constraints.

scholarly journals Towards a Classification of Weak Hand Holds

2016 ◽  
Vol 2 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Vadim Kimmelman ◽  
Anna Sáfár ◽  
Onno Crasborn
Keyword(s):  
Discourse Analysis ◽  
The Netherlands ◽  
American Sign Language ◽  
Sign Language ◽  
The Other ◽  
American Sign ◽  
Sign Languages ◽  
Linguistic Study ◽  
Corpus Data

AbstractThe two symmetrical manual articulators (the hands) in signed languages are a striking modalityspecific phonetic property. The weak hand can maintain the end position of an articulation while the other articulator continues to produce additional signs. This weak hand spreading (hold) has been analysed from various perspectives, highlighting its prosodic, syntactic, or discourse properties. The present study investigates corpus data from Sign Language of the Netherlands (NGT) and Russian Sign Language (RSL), two unrelated sign languages, in order to question the necessity of a sign-language specific notion of ‘buoy’ introduced in the discourse analysis of American Sign Language by Liddell (2003). Buoys are defined as weak hand holds that serve as a visible landmark throughout a stretch of discourse, and several types are distinguished based on their function and form. In the analysis of nearly two and a half hours of narratives and conversations from NGT and RSL, we found over 600 weak hand holds. We show that these holds can be analysed in terms of regular phonetic, syntactic, semantic, or discourse notions (or a combination thereof) familiar from the linguistic study of spoken languages, without the need for a sign language-specific notion of ‘buoy’.

scholarly journals Phonological restrictions on nominal pluralization in Sign Language of the Netherlands: evidence from corpus and elicited data

2021 ◽  
Vol 55 (2) ◽  
pp. 313-359
Author(s):  
Cindy van Boven
Keyword(s):  
The Netherlands ◽  
Sign Language ◽  
Lateral Side ◽  
Midsagittal Plane ◽  
Comprehensive Description ◽  
Sign Languages ◽  
Corpus Data ◽  
Plural Marking ◽  
Complex Movement

Abstract This study focuses on nominal pluralization in Sign Language of the Netherlands (NGT). The aim is to offer a comprehensive description of nominal pluralization processes in the language, based on both corpus data and elicited data, taking into account potential phonological restrictions. The results reveal that NGT nouns can undergo several pluralization processes, the main ones being simple reduplication (i.e., repeating the noun sign at one location) and sideward reduplication (i.e., repeating the noun sign while moving the hand sideward). The choice of pluralization process depends on phonological properties of the base noun: (i) nouns that are body-anchored or involve a complex movement undergo simple reduplication; (ii) nouns articulated at the lateral side of the signing space undergo sideward reduplication; (iii) nouns articulated on the midsagittal plane can undergo both simple and sideward reduplication. Strikingly, the data show considerable variation, and all types of nouns can be zero-marked, that is, plural marking on the noun is not obligatory. The results further suggest that all nouns can undergo at least one type of reduplication. Thus, while phonological properties of the base noun influence the type of reduplication, they do not block reduplication altogether. Plural reduplication in NGT is therefore less constrained than has been reported for other sign languages, where certain noun types cannot undergo reduplication. This shows that reduplication – despite being iconically motivated – is subject to language-specific grammatical constraints.

scholarly journals Transitivity prominence within and across modalities

2019 ◽  
Vol 5 (1) ◽  
pp. 666-689
Author(s):  
Carl Börstell ◽  
Tommi Jantunen ◽  
Vadim Kimmelman ◽  
Vanja de Lint ◽  
Johanna Mesch ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Sign Language ◽  
Sign Languages ◽  
Corpus Data ◽  
Direct Objects ◽  
Positive Correlations ◽  
Verb Meaning

AbstractWe investigate transitivity prominence of verbs across signed and spoken languages, based on data from both valency dictionaries and corpora. Our methodology relies on the assumption that dictionary data and corpus-based measures of transitivity are comparable, and we find evidence in support of this through the direct comparison of these two types of data across several spoken languages. For the signed modality, we measure the transitivity prominence of verbs in five sign languages based on corpus data and compare the results to the transitivity prominence hierarchy for spoken languages reported in Haspelmath (2015). For each sign language, we create a hierarchy for 12 verb meanings based on the proportion of overt direct objects per verb meaning. We use these hierarchies to calculate correlations between languages – both signed and spoken – and find positive correlations between transitivity hierarchies. Additional findings of this study include the observation that locative arguments seem to behave differently than direct objects judging by our measures of transitivity, and that relatedness among sign languages does not straightforwardly imply similarity in transitivity hierarchies. We conclude that our findings provide support for a modality-independent, semantic basis of transitivity.

scholarly journals Constructed Action, the Clause and the Nature of Syntax in Finnish Sign Language

2017 ◽  
Vol 3 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Tommi Jantunen
Keyword(s):  
Sign Language ◽  
The Body ◽  
Sign Languages ◽  
Corpus Data ◽  
Manual Activity

AbstractThis paper investigates the interplay of constructed action and the clause in Finnish Sign Language (FinSL). Constructed action is a form of gestural enactment in which the signers use their hands, face and other parts of the body to represent the actions, thoughts or feelings of someone they are referring to in the discourse. With the help of frequencies calculated from corpus data, this article shows firstly that when FinSL signers are narrating a story, there are differences in how they use constructed action. Then the paper argues that there are differences also in the prototypical structure, linkage type and non-manual activity of clauses, depending on the presence or non-presence of constructed action. Finally, taking the view that gesturality is an integral part of language, the paper discusses the nature of syntax in sign languages and proposes a conceptualization in which syntax is seen as a set of norms distributed on a continuum between a categorial-conventional end and a gradient-unconventional end.

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.

scholarly journals Event representations constrain the structure of language: Sign language as a window into universally accessible linguistic biases

2015 ◽  
Vol 112 (19) ◽  
pp. 5968-5973 ◽  
Author(s):  
Brent Strickland ◽  
Carlo Geraci ◽  
Emmanuel Chemla ◽  
Philippe Schlenker ◽  
Meltem Kelepir ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
The Netherlands ◽  
Sign Language ◽  
Visual Cues ◽  
Prior Experience ◽  
English Speakers ◽  
Sign Languages ◽  
Visual Form ◽  
Visual Boundary ◽  
Event Representations

According to a theoretical tradition dating back to Aristotle, verbs can be classified into two broad categories. Telic verbs (e.g., “decide,” “sell,” “die”) encode a logical endpoint, whereas atelic verbs (e.g., “think,” “negotiate,” “run”) do not, and the denoted event could therefore logically continue indefinitely. Here we show that sign languages encode telicity in a seemingly universal way and moreover that even nonsigners lacking any prior experience with sign language understand these encodings. In experiments 1–5, nonsigning English speakers accurately distinguished between telic (e.g., “decide”) and atelic (e.g., “think”) signs from (the historically unrelated) Italian Sign Language, Sign Language of the Netherlands, and Turkish Sign Language. These results were not due to participants' inferring that the sign merely imitated the action in question. In experiment 6, we used pseudosigns to show that the presence of a salient visual boundary at the end of a gesture was sufficient to elicit telic interpretations, whereas repeated movement without salient boundaries elicited atelic interpretations. Experiments 7–10 confirmed that these visual cues were used by all of the sign languages studied here. Together, these results suggest that signers and nonsigners share universally accessible notions of telicity as well as universally accessible “mapping biases” between telicity and visual form.

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.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document