Sign Languages and Sign Language Research

2015 ◽  
Author(s):  
Myriam Vermeerbergen ◽  
Mieke Van Herreweghe
Keyword(s):  
Sign Language ◽  
Sign Languages ◽  
Language Research

How long is the sign?

Linguistics ◽  
2015 ◽  
Vol 53 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Tommi Jantunen
Keyword(s):  
Sign Language ◽  
Structural Features ◽  
Sign Languages ◽  
Sign Recognition ◽  
Language Research

AbstractThis paper deals with the relative empirical length of signs in sign languages and provides evidence for the view that they are actually longer units than has hitherto been recognized. The evidence is presented from two perspectives: those of sign articulation and sign recognition. Concerning sign articulation, it is suggested that signs are longer units than is currently assumed because most of the structural features of signs are in fact already present before the currently accepted beginnings of signs and they continue after signs' generally accepted endings. Concerning sign recognition, the longer view of the sign is proposed on the grounds that the recognition point of signs is typically located before their alleged beginning, and because signs (as currently understood) can also be recognized on the basis of parts of their subsequent transitions only. The nature of the longer sign is discussed together with some more general consequences for sign language research of the revision of our view of what a sign might be.

scholarly journals Is There Any Hope for Developing Automated Translation Technology for Sign Languages?

2021 ◽  
pp. 61-73
Author(s):  
Tommi Jantunen ◽  
Rebekah Rousi ◽  
Päivi Rainò ◽  
Markku Turunen ◽  
Mohammad Moeen Valipoor ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Sign Language ◽  
Interaction Design ◽  
Language Translation ◽  
Speech Community ◽  
Sign Languages ◽  
Automated Translation ◽  
Language Research ◽  
Language User ◽  
The Moment ◽  
Language Detection

This article discusses the prerequisites for the machine translation of sign languages. The topic is complex, including questions relating to technology, interaction design, linguistics and culture. At the moment, despite the affordances provided by the technology, automated translation between signed and spoken languages – or between sign languages – is not possible. The very need of such translation and its associated technology can also be questioned. Yet, we believe that contributing to the improvement of sign language detection, processing and even sign language translation to spoken languages in the future is a matter that should not be abandoned. However, we argue that this work should focus on all necessary aspects of sign languages and sign language user communities. Thus, a more diverse and critical perspective towards these issues is needed in order to avoid generalisations and bias that is often manifested within dominant research paradigms particularly in the fields of spoken language research and speech community.

De Ontwikkeling Van Het Gebarentaal-Onderzoek

1986 ◽  
Vol 24 ◽  
pp. 118-126
Author(s):  
Bernard T. Tervoort
Keyword(s):  
Sign Language ◽  
First Language ◽  
Deaf Children ◽  
Sign Languages ◽  
Local Varieties ◽  
Research And Teaching ◽  
Hearing Parents ◽  
Language Research ◽  
History Of ◽  
Initial Interaction

In the recent history of scientific endeavour with signing deaf people and the attitudes towards it of society at large, four periods can be distinguished, (1) until about 1950: signing is either a primitive, sublinguistic system or a derivation of spoken language, or a combination of the two; (2) until about 1965: it could be a language provided it shows enough parallels with the structure of languages based on speech; (3) until about 1980: no matter how one looks at it, it shows striking parallels with these real languages; (4) until now: forget the criteria for spoken languages and the parallellism; sign languages have a structure and a function sui generis and ought to be investiga-ted in their own true linguistic value. Of all the disciplins that have gone through this development in the periods mentioned, the following are the most important ones and are dealt with in some detail (1) linguistics, specifically phonology, syntax and lexicology; (2) psycholinguistics, including first language acquisition of deaf children of both deaf and hearing parents; (3) sociolinguistics, with some accent on the relation to creóle studies, the discourse analysis, and the bilingual situation of the deaf as a minority of a unique kind; (4) other disciplins, very shortly, like otology, audiology, neurology, neuropsychology and psychiatry. Finally, the following four speakers in the section on sign language research are introduced with some information on their backgrounds and interests (1) Trude Schermer, with lexicography, syntax and sociolinguistic comparison of local varieties as main interest; (2) Filip Loncke as the main representant of sign language research in Flemish Belgium whose specialty is sign phonology; (3) Rita Harder who has specialized in both hand shape phonology and initial interaction and communication between young deaf children and their hearing mothers; (4) Harry Knoors who as a psycholinguist and a teacher of the deaf combines research and teaching.

Sign Languages

2020 ◽  
pp. 898-904
Author(s):  
Victoria Nyst
Keyword(s):  
Sign Language ◽  
Cote D'ivoire ◽  
Côte D’Ivoire ◽  
Western Country ◽  
Sign Languages ◽  
Guinea Bissau ◽  
Linguistic Research ◽  
Language Research ◽  
Young Family ◽  
Deaf School

African sign languages present a rich field for linguistic research. Locally evolved sign languages include an old village sign language like Adamorobe sign language (Ghana), and the very young village sign language of Bouakako (Côte d’Ivoire). They also include the emerging national sign language of Guinea-Bissau, following the establishment of the first deaf school in 2004, and the young family sign language of Berbey in Mali. Studies on locally evolved sign languages find structure and characteristics that seem to be typologically rare, based on the current set of (mainly Western) sign languages studied. In many countries, the sign language situation is highly multilingual, with deaf schools using a sign language that either originated in a Western country or was heavily influenced by one or more Western sign languages. More sign language research is badly needed to establish, improve, and expand facilities to provide deaf citizens with access to society.

Taking meaning in hand

2016 ◽  
Vol 19 (1) ◽  
pp. 37-81 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ryan Lepic ◽  
Carl Börstell ◽  
Gal Belsitzman ◽  
Wendy Sandler
Keyword(s):  
Sign Language ◽  
General Principle ◽  
Picture Naming ◽  
Naming Task ◽  
Sign Languages ◽  
Relationship Types ◽  
Language Research ◽  
Motivating Factor ◽  
Primary Relationship ◽  
Human Hands

Traditionally in sign language research, the issue of whether a lexical sign is articulated with one hand or two has been treated as a strictly phonological matter. We argue that accounting for two-handed signs also requires considering meaning as a motivating factor. We report results from a Swadesh list comparison, an analysis of semantic patterns among two-handed signs, and a picture-naming task. Comparing four unrelated languages, we demonstrate that the two hands are recruited to encode various relationship types in sign language lexicons. We develop the general principle that inherently “plural” concepts are straightforwardly mapped onto our paired human hands, resulting in systematic use of the two hands across sign languages. In our analysis, “plurality” subsumes four primary relationship types — interaction, location, dimension, and composition — and we predict that signs with meanings that encompass these relationships — such as ‘meet’, ‘empty’, ‘large’, or ‘machine’ — will preferentially be two-handed in any sign language.

scholarly journals Aspects of Türk Isaret Dili (Turkish Sign Language)

2003 ◽  
Vol 6 (1) ◽  
pp. 43-75 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ulrike Zeshan
Keyword(s):  
Sign Language ◽  
Head Tilt ◽  
Educational Background ◽  
Final Evaluation ◽  
Current Status ◽  
Deaf Community ◽  
Language Community ◽  
Sign Languages ◽  
Language Research ◽  
Grammatical Structures

This article provides a first overview of some striking grammatical structures in Türk İş aret Dili (Turkish Sign Language, TID), the sign language used by the Deaf community in Turkey. The data are described with a typological perspective in mind, focusing on aspects of TID grammar that are typologically unusual across sign languages. After giving an overview of the historical, sociolinguistic and educational background of TID and the language community using this sign language, five domains of TID grammar are investigated in detail. These include a movement derivation signalling completive aspect, three types of nonmanual negation — headshake, backward head tilt, and puffed cheeks — and their distribution, cliticization of the negator NOT to a preceding predicate host sign, an honorific whole-entity classifier used to refer to humans, and a question particle, its history and current status in the language. A final evaluation points out the significance of these data for sign language research and looks at perspectives for a deeper understanding of the language and its history.

scholarly journals Sign Language Research and Linguistic Theory

1986 ◽  
Vol 5 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Greg Evans
Keyword(s):  
American Sign Language ◽  
Sign Language ◽  
Linguistic Theory ◽  
American Sign ◽  
Sign Languages ◽  
Visual Spatial ◽  
Linguistic Research ◽  
Signed Language ◽  
Language Research ◽  
Structural Levels

Linguistic theory has traditionally defined language in terms of speech and has, as a result, labelled sign languages as non-linguistic systems. Recent advances in sign language linguistic research, however, indicate that modern linguistic theory must include sign language research and theory. This paper examines the historical bias linguistic theory has maintained towards sign languages and refutes the classification of sign languages as contrived artificial systems by surveying current linguistic research into American Sign Language. The growing body of American Sign Language research demonstrates that a signed language can have all the structural levels of spoken language despite its visual-spatial mode. This research also indicates that signed languages are an important source of linguistic data that can help further develop a cognitive linguistic theory.

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.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document