Russian Sign Language [Rsl] (A Language of Russia)

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

“Russian Sign Language [rsl] (A language of Russia) • Alternate Names: Russkij Âzyk Žestov • Population: 121,000 in Russian Federation (2010 census). 715,000 (2014 IMB). • Location: Scattered. Moscow and Saint Petersburg are major centers. • Language Status: 5 (Developing). • Dialects: Reported historical connections to sign languages in Austria and France, but not obvious from extensive wordlist comparison (Bickford 2005). Higher lexical similarity to sign languages in Ukraine and Moldova (Bickford 2005). Significant dialect variation. • Typology: One-handed fingerspelling (Cyrillic script). • Language Use: Hundreds of residential schools for deaf; some vocational schools, mainly oralist. Deaf associations and athletic clubs. Signed interpretation required in court and used at important public events. Many sign language classes for hearing people. Organization for sign language teachers. • Language Development: Films. TV. Videos. Dictionary. • Other Comments: First school for the deaf opened at Pavlovsk near St. Petersburg in 1806. Reported to also be used in Federal Republics such as Chechnya; in countries formerly part of the Soviet Union, such as Latvia, Estonia, Lithuania, Moldova, Ukraine, Belarus, Kazakhstan, Kygryzstan, Tajikistan, and Uzbekistan. In some of these locations, other sign languages are also reported to be used; but it is not known to what extent these are separate distinct sign languages, related sign languages or dialects of RSL. Christian (Orthodox).” Lewis, M. Paul, Gary F. Simons, and Charles D. Fennig (eds.) 2015. Ethnologue: Languages of the World, Eighteenth edition. Dallas, Texas: SIL International. Online version: http://www.ethnologue.com. Related Readings Kimmelman, Vadim 2012 Word Order in Russian Sign Language. Sign Language Studies 12(4): 414-827. Kimmelman, Vadim 2009 Parts of Speech in Russian Sign Language: The Role of Iconicity and Economy. Sign Language & Linguistics 12(2): 161. Last Updated: April 16, 2015 .

Copy Link

Recommended publications

Sign Language Typology Series
SIGN LANGUAGE TYPOLOGY SERIES The Sign Language Typology Series is dedicated to the comparative study of sign languages around the world. Individual or collective works that systematically explore typological variation across sign languages are the focus of this series, with particular emphasis on undocumented, underdescribed and endangered sign languages. The scope of the series primarily includes cross-linguistic studies of grammatical domains across a larger or smaller sample of sign languages, but also encompasses the study of individual sign languages from a typological perspective and comparison between signed and spoken languages in terms of language modality, as well as theoretical and methodological contributions to sign language typology. Interrogative and Negative Constructions in Sign Languages Edited by Ulrike Zeshan Sign Language Typology Series No. 1 / Interrogative and negative constructions in sign languages / Ulrike Zeshan (ed.) / Nijmegen: Ishara Press 2006. ISBN-10: 90-8656-001-6 ISBN-13: 978-90-8656-001-1 © Ishara Press Stichting DEF Wundtlaan 1 6525XD Nijmegen The Netherlands Fax: +31-24-3521213 email: [email protected] http://ishara.def-intl.org Cover design: Sibaji Panda Printed in the Netherlands First published 2006 Catalogue copy of this book available at Depot van Nederlandse Publicaties, Koninklijke Bibliotheek, Den Haag (www.kb.nl/depot) To the deaf pioneers in developing countries who have inspired all my work Contents Preface........................................................................................................10
[Show full text]
Sign Language Endangerment and Linguistic Diversity Ben Braithwaite
RESEARCH REPORT Sign language endangerment and linguistic diversity Ben Braithwaite University of the West Indies at St. Augustine It has become increasingly clear that current threats to global linguistic diversity are not re - stricted to the loss of spoken languages. Signed languages are vulnerable to familiar patterns of language shift and the global spread of a few influential languages. But the ecologies of signed languages are also affected by genetics, social attitudes toward deafness, educational and public health policies, and a widespread modality chauvinism that views spoken languages as inherently superior or more desirable. This research report reviews what is known about sign language vi - tality and endangerment globally, and considers the responses from communities, governments, and linguists. It is striking how little attention has been paid to sign language vitality, endangerment, and re - vitalization, even as research on signed languages has occupied an increasingly prominent posi - tion in linguistic theory. It is time for linguists from a broader range of backgrounds to consider the causes, consequences, and appropriate responses to current threats to sign language diversity. In doing so, we must articulate more clearly the value of this diversity to the field of linguistics and the responsibilities the field has toward preserving it.* Keywords : language endangerment, language vitality, language documentation, signed languages 1. Introduction. Concerns about sign language endangerment are not new. Almost immediately after the invention of film, the US National Association of the Deaf began producing films to capture American Sign Language (ASL), motivated by a fear within the deaf community that their language was endangered (Schuchman 2004).
[Show full text]
General Assembly Distr.: General 9 November 2020
United Nations A/C.5/75/INF/1 General Assembly Distr.: General 9 November 2020 Original: English/French Seventy-fifth session Fifth Committee Membership of the Fifth Committee Membres de la Cinquième Commission Note: Delegations are kindly requested to submit any changes or updates to the official list of their representatives, alternate representatives and advisers through the e-List of participants module on the e-deleGATE secure portal. Note: Les délégations sont priées de bien vouloir communiquer toute modification apportée à la liste officielle de leurs représentants, représentants suppléants et conseillers, ou toute mise à jour de celle-ci, au moyen du module « e-List of participants » sur le portail sécurisé e-deleGATE. Chair Président Mr. Carlos Amorín (Uruguay) Vice-Chairs Vice-présidents Mr. Katlego Boase Mmalane Mr. Jakub Krzysztof Chmielewski Mrs. Armağan Ayşe Can Crabtree (Botswana) (Poland) (Turkey) Rapporteur Mr. Tsu Tang Terrence Teo (Singapore) Secretariat of the Fifth Committee Secrétariat de la Cinquième Commission Acting Secretary Secrétaire par intérim Mr. Lionelito Berridge Deputy Secretary Secrétaire adjoint Mr. Wiryanto Sumitro Note: The present document is being circulated in English and French only. 20-14884 (E) 131120 *2014884* A/C.5/75/INF/1 Member States États Membres Country | Pays Representatives | Représentants Alternates | Suppléants Advisers | Conseillers Afghanistan Mrs. Adela Raz Mr. Ahmad Suhail Hedayat Albania Ms. Besiana Kadare Ms. Almona Bajramaj Mr. Seamus Boyle Algeria Mr. Sofiane Mimouni Mr. Mohammed Bessedik Mr. Nabil Kalkoul Andorra Ms. Elisenda Vives Balmaña Mr. Joan Josep López Lavado Mr. Guillem Kallis Baldrich Angola Antigua and Mr. Claxton Duberry Barbuda Mr. Glentis Thomas Argentina Ms.
[Show full text]
Sources of Variation in Mongolian Sign Language
33 Sources of Variation in Mongolian Sign Language Leah C. Geer University of Texas at Austin 1. Introduction1 During a nine month period in which data on Mongolian Sign Language (MSL) were collected in a Field Methods course, there were numerous instances of disagreement between language consultants on the correct sign for a given concept. The present paper seeks to describe these disagreements in terms of the potential sources of language variation among language consultants. The remainder of this paper is organized as follows: In section 1 we provide a sampling of previous work on language contact and language variation and describe the link between them. We then discuss the linguistic outcomes of contact situations between signed and spoken languages versus signed and signed languages as they relate to the present investigation. In section 2 we describe how data were collected and annotated and in section 3 we present our findings. Section 4 includes a discussion of these findings with respect to previous work on language contact, language variation, and language attitudes. In section 5 we close with brief mention of how to expand upon this work in the future. 1.1 Background: Language contact and language variation Several studies of lexical variation in signed languages have been undertaken: Lucas, Bayley & Valli (1991) for American Sign Language (ASL); Schembri, Johnston & Goswell (2006), Schembri & Johnston (2006, 2007) for Australian Sign Language (Auslan); and McKee & McKee (2011) for New Zealand Sign Language (NZSL), just to 1 Many thanks are in order here. First to our consultants (and in particular NB who has maintained contact with me and always been eager to answer questions), who shared their language with our group.
[Show full text]
Automatic Classification of Handshapes in Russian Sign
Proceedings of the 9th Workshop on the Representation and Processing of Sign Languages, pages 165–170 Language Resources and Evaluation Conference (LREC 2020), Marseille, 11–16 May 2020 c European Language Resources Association (ELRA), licensed under CC-BY-NC Automatic Classification of Handshapes in Russian Sign Language Medet Mukushev∗, Alfarabi Imashev∗, Vadim Kimmelmany, Anara Sandygulova∗ ∗Department of Robotics and Mechatronics, School of Engineering and Digital Sciences, Nazarbayev University Kabanbay Batyr Avenue, 53, Nur-Sultan, Kazakhstan yDepartment of Linguistic, Literary and Aesthetic Studies, University of Bergen Postboks 7805, 5020, Bergen, Norway [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected] Abstract Handshapes are one of the basic parameters of signs, and any phonological or phonetic analysis of a sign language must account for handshapes. Many sign languages have been carefully analysed by sign language linguists to create handshape inventories. This has theoretical implications, but also applied use, as an inventory is necessary for generating corpora for sign languages that can be searched, filtered, sorted by different sign components (such as handshapes, orientation, location, movement, etc.). However, creating an inventory is a very time-consuming process, thus only a handful of sign languages have them. Therefore, in this work we firstly test an unsupervised approach with the aim to automatically generate a handshape inventory. The process includes hand detection, cropping, and clustering techniques, which we apply to a commonly used resource: the Spreadthesign online dictionary (www.spreadthesign.com), in particular to Russian Sign Language (RSL). We then manually verify the data to be able to apply supervised learning to classify new data.
[Show full text]
Typology of Signed Languages: Differentiation Through Kinship Terminology Erin Wilkinson
View metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk brought to you by CORE provided by University of New Mexico University of New Mexico UNM Digital Repository Linguistics ETDs Electronic Theses and Dissertations 7-1-2009 Typology of Signed Languages: Differentiation through Kinship Terminology Erin Wilkinson Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalrepository.unm.edu/ling_etds Recommended Citation Wilkinson, Erin. "Typology of Signed Languages: Differentiation through Kinship Terminology." (2009). https://digitalrepository.unm.edu/ling_etds/40 This Dissertation is brought to you for free and open access by the Electronic Theses and Dissertations at UNM Digital Repository. It has been accepted for inclusion in Linguistics ETDs by an authorized administrator of UNM Digital Repository. For more information, please contact [email protected]. TYPOLOGY OF SIGNED LANGUAGES: DIFFERENTIATION THROUGH KINSHIP TERMINOLOGY BY ERIN LAINE WILKINSON B.A., Language Studies, Wellesley College, 1999 M.A., Linguistics, Gallaudet University, 2001 DISSERTATION Submitted in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy Linguistics The University of New Mexico Albuquerque, New Mexico August, 2009 ©2009, Erin Laine Wilkinson ALL RIGHTS RESERVED iii DEDICATION To my mother iv ACKNOWLEDGMENTS Many thanks to Barbara Pennacchi for kick starting me on my dissertation by giving me a room at her house, cooking me dinner, and making Italian coffee in Rome during November 2007. Your endless support, patience, and thoughtful discussions are gratefully taken into my heart, and I truly appreciate what you have done for me. I heartily acknowledge Dr. William Croft, my advisor, for continuing to encourage me through the long number of months writing and rewriting these chapters.
[Show full text]
Sign Languages in Contact
INTRO_Sign_Pozos_Gaul_193027 7/30/07 11:19 AM Page 1 Editor’s Introduction: Outlining Considerations for the Study of Signed Language Contact David Quinto-Pozos To my knowledge, this volume represents the ﬁrst book-length collec- tion of various accounts of contact between sign languages, and this brings with it excitement as well as the realization of challenges that lie ahead.1 As many researchers who are interested in language contact might suggest, it is exciting because these chapters contribute to our un- derstanding of the structural and social aspects of contact and how such contact affects language in the visual-gestural modality. They provide us with information about Deaf communities throughout the world, as well as language data that speak to the ways in which contact is manifested in those communities. This global perspective allows us to examine con- tact situations in search of commonalties and recurring patterns. It also enables us to see how some outcomes of contact between sign languages might or might not ﬁt the general patterns of contact that have been demonstrated for spoken languages. Perhaps as a way to balance the ex- citement about this topic, the sobering truth is that we know so little about contact between sign languages. As a result, we are faced with the task of documenting examples of such contact and the challenge of ex- amining the effects of visual meaning creation on linguistic structures that occur in these contact situations. By focusing on this area of inquiry, we stand to gain much knowledge about how language works. The study of language contact among signed languages forces us to carefully consider how the visual-gestural modality of human com- munication influences language birth, development, change, and de- cay or loss from disuse.
[Show full text]
Chapter 2 Sign Language Types
Chapter 2 Sign language types This chapter defines four different sign language types, based on the infor- mation available in the respective sources. Before introducing the types of sign languages, I first report on the diachronic developments in the field of typological sign language research that gave rise to the distinction of the various sign language types. Sign language research started about five decades ago in the United States of America mainly due to the pioneering work of Stokoe (2005 [1960]), Klima and Bellugi (1979), and Poizner, Klima and Bellugi (1987) on American Sign Language (ASL). Gradually linguists in other countries, mainly in Europe, became interested in sign language research and started analyzing European sign languages e.g. British Sign Language (BSL), Swedish Sign Language (SSL), Sign Language of the Netherlands (NGT) and German Sign Language (DGS). Most of the in-depth linguistic descrip- tions have been based on Western sign languages. Therefore, it has long been assumed that some fundamental levels of linguistic structure, such as spatial morphology and syntax, operate identically in all sign languages. Recent studies, however, have discovered some important variations in spatial organization in some previously unknown sign languages (Washabaugh, 1986; Nyst, 2007; Marsaja, 2008; Padden, Meir, Aronoff, & Sandler, 2010). In the context of growing interest in non-Western sign languages towards the end of the 1990s and more recently, there have been efforts towards developing a typology of sign languages (Zeshan, 2004ab, 2008, 2011b; Schuit, Baker, & Pfau, 2011). Although it has been repeatedly emphasized in the literature that the sign language research still has too little data on sign languages other than those of national deaf communities, based in Western or Asian cultures (Zeshan, 2008).
[Show full text]
ICSD Report 2013-2017
! " INTERNATIONAL COMMITTEE " OF SPORTS FOR THE DEAF # ICSD REPORT " 2013 - 2017 www.ciss.org | www.deaflympics.com !1 ! " INTERNATIONAL COMMITTEE " OF SPORTS FOR THE DEAF # CONTENTS: 3. Message from the ICSD President Dr. Valery Rukhledev 5. Message from the IOC President Thomas Bach 6. ICSD Mission 8. Introduction 9. Deaf Sports Movement 10. Congress 11. ICSD Executive Board 13. ICSD Report 18. ICSD Secretariat 25. Regional Sports Confederations 27. Technical Directors 29. International Relations 30. 18th Winter Deaflympics 2015, Khanty-Mansiysk / Magnitogorsk 35. 23rd Summer Deaflympics 2017, Samsun 38. World Deaf Championships 39. Media 43. Finance 49. Conclusion www.ciss.org | www.deaflympics.com !2 ! " INTERNATIONAL COMMITTEE " OF SPORTS FOR THE DEAF MESSAGE FROM ICSD PRESIDENT DR. VALERY RUKHLEDEV Dear participants of the 46th ICSD Congress and to the extended Deaflympics Family! I welcome you to the beautiful city of Samsun for the Congress of the 23rd Summer Deaflympics 2017! How exciting is it to begin the countdown to the Opening Ceremony of the first-ever Deaflympics in Turkey! Although the Deaf community`s attention will turn to the athletes and the competition, I am sure that all of you feel the anticipation building for the Games. Everything is ready! Sports infrastructure is ready as well as the spectators, and most importantly - our great athletes are ready! I’ve been to Samsun numerous times and I’ve been very pleased to see how initial challenges have been addressed and that sports venues have been completed following positive cooperation between ICSD, Organizing Committee and NDSFs. The standard of the Deaflympics village is of the highest level with the best training facilities.
[Show full text]
Database of Russian Sign Language
Proceedings of the 12th Conference on Language Resources and Evaluation (LREC 2020), pages 6079–6085 Marseille, 11–16 May 2020 c European Language Resources Association (ELRA), licensed under CC-BY-NC TheRuSLan: Database of Russian Sign Language Ildar Kagirov, Denis Ivanko, Dmitry Ryumin, Alexander Axyonov, Alexey Karpov St. Petersburg Institute for Informatics and Automation of the Russian Academy of Sciences St. Petersburg, Russia {kagirov, karpov}@iias.spb.su, [email protected], {a.aksenov95, dl_03.03.1991}@mail.ru Abstract In this paper, a new Russian sign language multimedia database TheRuSLan is presented. The database includes lexical units (single words and phrases) from Russian sign language within one subject area, namely, "food products at the supermarket", and was collected using MS Kinect 2.0 device including both FullHD video and the depth map modes, which provides new opportunities for the lexicographical description of the Russian sign language vocabulary and enhances research in the field of automatic gesture recognition. Russian sign language has an official status in Russia, and over 120,000 deaf people in Russia and its neighboring countries use it as their first language. Russian sign language has no writing system, is poorly described and belongs to the low-resource languages. The authors formulate the basic principles of annotation of sign words, based on the collected data, and reveal the content of the collected database. In the future, the database will be expanded and comprise more lexical units. The database is explicitly made for the task of creating an automatic system for Russian sign language recognition. Keywords: Russian sign language, low resourced languages, corpora annotation, image recognition, machine learning people worldwide have disabling hearing loss, and this 1.
[Show full text]
Alumni Newsletter Vol
Membership matters. This publication is paid for in part by the dues-paying members of the Indiana University Alumni Association. Indiana University Depar tment of Slavic Languages and Literatures Alumni Newsletter Vol. 13 College of Arts & Sciences Summer 2009 From the department chair Federal grant supports study of A time of transition U.S.-Russia global health care and celebration On July , 2008, Ronald Feldstein has attracted science majors to the study of stepped down from the position of chair U.S. Department of Russian. of the Department of Slavic Languages Education project The IU–SFedU project also includes and Literatures and I assumed that role. development of intelligent computer-as- Please join me in thanking Ron for his enters third year sisted language learning (ICALL) materi- many years of leadership and wishing him success in all his future endeavors. by Olena Chernishenko als for Russian language training. One of the unique features of ICALL from the Over his IU career, Ron has served off and on as chair for 5 years. During this In 2007, the Department of Slavic Lan- perspective of language-exercise design time, he worked hard to keep day-to- guages and Literatures won a two-year, software is its ability to generate feedback day operations running smoothly and to $400,000, grant from the U.S. Department based on input during usage. maintain high standards of teaching and of Education (administered by the Fund for The grant project also helped pay for IU research within the department. I aspire the Improvement of Postsecondary Educa- students to study Russian at IUB and travel to continue with the same combination tion program and the Russian Ministry to Rostov-on-Don for a two-week sum- of acumen and energy he brought to of Education and Science).
[Show full text]
A Sociolinguistic Study
Chapter 1 Introduction This volume is the result of a study that addressed several unknowns about a signed language contact phenomenon known as International Sign. International Sign (abbreviated IS) is a form of contact signing used in international settings where people who are deaf attempt to communi- cate with others who do not share the same conventional, native signed language (NSL).1 The term has been broadly used to refer to a range of semiotic strategies of interlocutors in multilingual signed language situa- tions, whether in pairs, or in small or large group communications. The research herein focuses on one type of IS produced by deaf leaders when they give presentations at international conferences, which I con- sider to be a type of sign language contact in the form of expository IS. There has been very little empirical investigation of sign language contact varieties, and IS as a conference lingua franca is one example of language contact that has become widely recognized for its cross-linguistic com- municative potential. The larger piece of this research examines comprehension of exposi- tory IS lectures created by deaf people for other deaf people from different countries. By examining authentic examples of deaf people constructing messages with lecture IS, one can uncover features of more or less effec- tive IS, and one can become better informed about IS as a sign language contact strategy. By investigating sociolinguistic features of IS contact, and identifying factors impacting its comprehension, one might ascertain optimal contexts for using IS as a means of linguistic accessibility. This research contributes to a limited literature about IS and aims to help 1.
[Show full text]